(Part One)

In 1873, a Mr. McCoy moved from Louisville, Ky., to Arkansas. He served as constable for seven years, and two terms as Justice of the Peace in Hot Spring County. In 1884, he became a Seventh-day Adventist. At the August, 1885, term of the Circuit Court of that county, he was indicted for Sabbath breaking being charged with plowing his field on Sunday.

In 1884, Mr. J. L. Shockey, a Seventh-day Adventist, moved from Ohio and settled on a piece of railroad land six miles north of Malvern, the seat of Hot Spring County. On September 14, 1885, he was arrested for having been seen plowing his field on Sunday the previous Spring. He gave bond for his appearance before the February term of the Circuit Court in Malvern. (See The Two Republics, pp. 879-880)

This year, on March 9, now over 100 years later in an adjoining county - Garland - the citizens of Hot Springs, Arkansas in a public referendum by an almost 2 to 1 margin voted to legalize horse racing on Sunday with. its pari-mutuel betting.

During the recent American national election in November, of last year, both in Maryland and in Arkansas, municipalities overturned "blue laws." Mandatory Sunday closing statutes were repealed in Maryland, and in Arkansas, two communities approved Sunday alcohol sales. In Little Rock, the capitol and one of the communities to so decide, the vote was 65% for and 35% against. All of these expressions at the voting booth reflect the pluralistic and changing attitude of American society.

Not only here in America is this change visible, but the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops also noted this change in Canada. In a release, "The Meaning of Sunday in a Pluralistic Society" (September, 1986), the bishops cited a need to review the place of Sunday in a secular

Page 2

society. While they noted that "most Christians" celebrate Sunday to commemorate the resurrection of Jesus, they observed, "however, that in our multicultural and pluralistic society there are others who do not share this belief. They honor a different day of worship or see no need at all for setting aside a day of praise and thanksgiving to God. Given the change in our society, it is no longer appropriate to protect Sunday closing laws on the basis that most Christians hold it to be the Day of the Lord."

This does not mean that the Bishops are planning to abandon Sunday legislation. Citing Pope John Paul I's encyclical on human work, that all have a "right to rest," they declare that "this right includes at least one regular weekly day of rest." Their perceptions and solutions are interesting. They write:

In our pluralistic society, the choice of Sunday as the day of renewal for all is rooted more in tradition than religious conviction. Many groups, especially the labor movement, have emphasized repeatedly that Sundays are our traditional days of pause. In our society, the observance of Sunday as a holiday is more firmly entrenched in people's habits than any other day of the week. Sunday's off are a part of our culture, a culture that Christians have shaped in the past and in which they continue to take their rightful place in full and free cooperation with people of other religions and world views.

Finally, it is clear that there will always be some members of the workforce who will have to work on Sunday to provide essential services for the public. They deserve our understanding and appreciation for their contribution to the common good. However, even for these workers, employees or professionals, we should carefully protect and respect their right to enjoy the full benefits of Sundays, at least on an alternating basis.

These pastoral reflections of the Canadian bishops of the Roman Catholic Church should be noted carefully. The goal is to have a "Protected Sunday" for the majority without a "penalty" on the minority. However, this "protected Sunday" would fall short of forbidding all Sunday business and would not interfere with sports ("playfulness"). [Underscored emphasis added in this edited document.]

The impact of a pluralistic society seems to be recognized by all except some Seventh-day Adventists who wish to make capital of the Sunday Law issue for their own ends. There is no question but that the subject of Sunday laws catches Adventist attention. The experience of the past as noted above, not only that which occurred in Arkansas, but also in Tennessee, arouses deep emotions. Besides this, various quotations can be marshaled from the Writings to sustain the emphasis. But it is over the misapplication of the Ellen G. White Writings that has led to this blind spot in our evaluation of the present. This is compounded by the fact that we are not willing to apply the rules which Ellen White gave for the study of her Writings.

The Rules

Ellen G. White wrote that "the testimonies themselves will be the key that will explain the messages given, as scripture is explained by scripture." (SM, Bk 1, p. 42) A second rule states - "Regarding the testimonies; nothing is cast aside; but time and place must be considered." (Ibid., p. 57.)

A failure to follow these simple rules has led to a jangling jungle of voices on the periphery of the Adventist Community. Each voice claims to have discovered some new way to attain perfection by human endeavor. These siren calls come from persons with varied backgrounds of experience, some from the drug culture, and some with no other objective than personal gain. Each call regardless of motive takes some statement or statements from the testimonies, related or unrelated, and builds upon this a theory of salvation through human works. These verily make of non-effect the Writings.

Interestingly, Ellen G. White in setting forth the rules noted above, warned that there would be those "who would search for new and strange doctrines, for something odd and sensational to present to the people. They will bring in all conceivable fallacies, and will present them as coming from Mrs. White, that they may beguile souls." These "will misinterpret the messages that God has given, in accordance with their personal blindness." (Ibid., p. 41)

If we would compare testimony with testimony as we do (or should do) the Scriptures, taking time to note in regard to these testimonies "time and place," we would have a clear line of truth which would be in harmony with Bible truth arrived at in the same way. For example, if in our studying from the Bible the basic doctrine of the state of man after death and eternal rewards, we accepted as literal the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, and set forth as cardinal teaching the conclusions to be thus drawn, what would we believe? This same approach is being made in the study of the Writings with only those segments of the Writings being compiled which support some preconceived theory to appeal to the human desire for something sensational or something which will sustain their ego.

Application

When we apply the two simple rules to the question of a "National Sunday Law" and start comparing testimony with testimony, the first thing we discover is that this phrase is not found in the Writings. The application of "time and place" to that which has been written in regard to a Sunday Law could be divided into pre and post 1900. [Underscored emphasis added in this edited document.]

At the very time - 1885 - the incidents which we cited on page 1 were taking place in Arkansas, Ellen G. White was emphasizing two things. Starting in 1878 and continuing through 1886 she wrote:

We are now upon the very borders of the eternal world. (4T:306)

Eternity stretches before us. The curtain is about to be lifted. (5T:464)

In connection with this emphasis on the nearness of the end, she wrote also about a Sunday Law and its significance. Her words are:

By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. (5T:451)

This "decree enforcing" the papal Sabbath is noted as a "warning" signal "to leave the larger cities" with the ultimate objective of "retired homes in secluded places among the mountains." (5T:464-465)

In 1889, Ellen White would write:

Events which for more than forty years we have, upon the authority of the prophetic word, declared to be impending, are now taking place before our eyes. Already the question of an amendment to the Constitution restricting liberty of conscience, has been urged upon the legislators of the nation. The question of enforcing Sunday observance has become one of national interest and importance. (5T:711; emphasis mine)

This was a true evaluation of what was then taking place. On May 21, 1888, Senator H. W. Blair introduced a National Sunday-Rest Bill into Congress. It was opposition to this and subsequent religious legislation which catapulted A. T. Jones to the forefront of Adventism. However, out of this agitation for Sunday legislation, Congress finally voted into an appropriations bill for the Columbian Exposition of 1892, a Sunday closing amendment which was signed into law by President Benjamin Harrison on August 5, 1892.

Rightly or wrongly, A. T. Jones perceived this law as giving life to the image of the beast of Revelation 13, and that the mark of the beast had been established. Coupling this Congressional action with the Message of 1888, Ellen G. White could write - "The time of test is just before us" indicating that God's people had reached the time for the fulfillment of Revelation 18; and "the loud cry of the third angel had already begun." (R&H, Nov. 22, 1892)

During this final decade of the 19th Century, there was constant agitation over the Sunday question which presented an unparalleled opportunity for the Adventist to witness to the Sabbath truth. Major statements concerning Sunday, its origin as a day of worship, were made which were used and have been used by Adventist evangelists in the decades since then. (See pp. 5-6)

Since 1900

Counsel to get out of the cities continued to come from the pen of Ellen G. White. In 1906, she wrote "'Out of the cities; out of the cities!' this is the message the Lord has been giving me." (Life Sketches, p. 409).

But the "message" was not connected with the Sunday Law as a sign to leave the cities. Instead, she declared - "On these cities, God's judgments will fall." (Letter 158, 1902) In 1905, she indicated the global extent of the message to get out of the cities, by writing - "The world over, cities are becoming hot beds of vice." (Ministry of Healing, p. 363) Then in 1907, the warning came - "Our cities are increasing in wickedness, and it becoming more and more evident that those who remain in them unnecessarily do so at the peril of their soul's salvation." (Ms. 115, 1907)

By comparing testimony with testimony, there is revealed a broadening of the issues which will bring about the same ends had the objectives of the Sunday Law issue of the final decade of the 19th Century been realized. Observe these two statements written with a 22 year time gap, but with the same end result:

1888 -- A time is coming when the law of God is, in a special sense, to be made void in our land. The rulers of our nation will, by legislative enactments, enforce the Sunday law, and thus God's people will be brought into great peril. When our nation, in its legislative councils, shall enact laws to bind the consciences of man in regard to their religious privileges, enforcing Sunday observance, and bringing oppressive power to bear against those who keep the seventh-day Sabbath, the law of God will, to all intents and purposes, be made void in our land; and national apostasy will be followed by national ruin. (R&H, Dec. 18, 1888; 7BC:977)

1910 -- When the Protestant churches shall unite with the secular power to sustain a false religion, for opposing which their ancestors endured the fiercest persecution; when the state shall use its power to enforce the decrees and sustain the institutions of the church - then will Protestant America have formed an image to the papacy, and there will be a national apostasy which will end only in national ruin. (ST, March 22, 1910; 7BC:976)

You will observe that these two quotations are connected by the end result - national apostasy will be followed by national ruin. But in 1910, the base has been widened from a single issue of a law "enforcing Sunday observance" to the exercise of the power of the state "to enforce the decrees" of the church" and to sustain their "institutions." The picture calls for a union "with the secular power to sustain a false religion."

Why is this change of means indicated for the accomplishment of the same ends? Again it must be remembered that in 1901, Ellen White wrote:

We may have to remain here in this world because of insubordination many more years, as did the children of Israel, but for Christ's sake, His people should not add sin to sin by charging God with the consequence of their own wrong course of action. (Ms. 184, 1901)

To this might be added that because we have been in this world "many more years," we should now compound our present predicament by wrongly comparing "testimony with testimony" and giving a perverted picture of the Sunday Law question to further personal ends? God has given in the same testimonies a sign to look for, and He has clearly indicated the nature of a Sunday Law which will indeed be oppressive. Besides this, there is clearly suggested the fact that all will not be so apparent to perceive as we would hope, but rather will be more deceptive and far more difficult to combat.

Tragically, when the full force of the reality will become apparent, too many will be caught totally unprepared because they have been lulled into a fatal delusion by a misinterpretation of the testimonies. Surface reading plus the siren calls of false "watchmen" will have produced tragic consequences. My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; but it is knowledge they could have had if they would have but followed the rules given for understanding the Writings. To be continued . . .

Page 5

SABBATH QUESTION AGITATION - 1889-1905

1889

T. Enright of the Redemptorist Fathers - Industrial American, Harlan, Iowa:

The Bible says; "Remember the Sabbath day. to keep it holy," but the Catholic Church says: "No, keep the first day of the week," and all the world bows in obedience. (January 19, 1889)

1893

The Christian Sabbath, (2nd Ed.; Baltimore: The Catholic Mirror [Official Organ of Cardinal Gibbons])*

The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday. (p. 29)

Dr. E. T. Hiscox, Baptist Clergyman and Author of the Baptist Manual in a paper read August 20, 1893 at Saratoga, NY, at a Baptist Minister's Meeting.

Of course I quite wall know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of Paganism, and Christened with the name of the Sun-god. Then adopted and sanctified by the Papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism, and the Christian world ...

1894

The Catholic World, a magazine of General Literature and Science, March, 1894.

The church took the pagan philosophy and made it the buckler of faith against the heathen. She took the Roman Pantheon, temple of all the gods, and made it sacred to all the martyrs; so it stands to this day. She took the pagan Sunday and made it the Christian Sunday ...

The sun was the foremost god with heathendom ... Hence the church in these countries would seem to have said, "Keep that old, pagan name. It shall remain consecrated, sanctified." And thus the pagan Sunday, dedicated to Balder [White God of the Scandinavians], became the Christian Sunday sacred to Jesus. (p.809)

1895

A Letter from the Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons to J. F. Snyder of Bloomington, Illinois, Nov. 11, 1895.

Of course the Catholic Church claims the change was her act. It could not have been otherwise, as none in those days would have dreamed of doing anything in matters spiritual and ecclesiastical without her. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.

1897

John Milner, a Roman Catholic Divine, to James Brown, a member of a Protestant Religious Society, Letter #11 in The End of Religious Controversy (New York: P.J. Kennedy) [After reviewing the history of the Sabbath from Creation through the life of Christ, Milner drew the following conclusion in his letter]

Yet with all of this weight of Scripture authority for keeping the Sabbath or seventh day holy, Protestants, of all denominations, make this a profane day and transfer the obligation of it to the first day of the week, or the Sunday. Now what authority have they for doing this? None at all, but the unwritten Word, or tradition of the Catholic church, ... (p. 89, Emphasis his)

Page 6

1899

T Enright CssR, Kansas City, MO, June 16, 1899

I hereby offer $1000, to anyone who can prove to me, from the Bible alone, that I am bound, under pain of grievous sin, to keep Sunday holy.

1902

Letter from T. Enright, dated April 26, 1902 from Detroit, MI.

I still offer $1000 to anyone who can prove to me, from the Bible alone, that I am bound under pain of grievous sin, to keep Sunday holy. We keep Sunday in obedience to the law of the Catholic Church. The church made this law long after the Bible was written; hence the law is not in the Bible. The Catholic church abolished not only the Sabbath, but all the other Jewish Festivals.

1905

Letter from T. Enright, dated June, 1905 from St Louis, MO.

I have offered and still offer $1000 to anyone who can prove to me from the Bible alone, that I am bound, under grievous sin. to keep Sunday holy. It was the Catholic Church which made the law obliging us to keep Sunday holy. The church made this law long after the Bible was written. Hence said law is not in the Bible. Christ, our Lord empowered his church to make laws binding in conscience.

* -- The four articles in The Catholic Mirror demonstrated from the Bible that Adventists were the only consistent Protestants since the Bible provided no justification for Sunday observance. These articles challenged Protestants either to admit their debt to the Roman Catholic Church or to keep the Bible Sabbath. The Adventists had these articles published in a booklet - Rome's Challenge to Protestants. It was given wide circulation and used effectively by their evangelists.

(Part Two)

Page 2

During the crucial years of 1901-1903, Ellen G. White introduced three factors into the events of the last days. Not only did she indicate that we would have to remain many more years in this world because of insubordination (Ms. 184, 1901), but she also wrote immediately following the 1903 General Conference session that - "In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to weighed." (8T:247) In simple terms this was telling the Church, that it, too, as a corporate entity had to pass the review of the Judgment. The Church could not take for granted that its status, as the recipient in trust of "the last warning message for a perishing world" (9T:19), would place it beyond accountability as to how it ministered that sacred trust. If it did not prove true to that trust, it would be "found wanting." (8T:247) (Italicized emphasis added.)

Further, in 1902, Ellen White wrote - "All need wisdom to carefully search out the mystery of iniquity that figures so largely in the winding up of this world's history." (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 118) The working of "the mystery of iniquity" in the final affairs is not going to be as simple as 2+2=4, but must be "carefully searched out." Simply printing a national Sunday Law booklet and urging its distribution is not searching out "the mystery of iniquity," but is rather lulling the unsuspected into a total delusion that the final issues will be very obvious. While it is true that "the day of the Lord" is not to overtake us "as a thief in the night," it is conditioned upon the premise that we must be "children of the light." (I Thess.5:1-6) One cannot be a child of the light, following the principles set forth to understand that light - "time and place;" and yet be the devotees of the hawkers of the sensational who are soliciting through that means a "fast buck."

Not only did Ellen G. White call attention to the

Page 2

working of "the mystery of iniquity;" but in 1901, she observed that Christ connected specific historical events with the scenes that were to take place "just prior" to His return a second time. It would be a new "signal" as the Sunday Law was intended to be in the preceding decade. She wrote:

In the twenty-first chapter of Luke, Christ foretold what was to come upon Jerusalem and with it He connected the scenes which were to take place in the history of this world just prior to the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Counsels to Writers and Editors, pp. 23-24.) (Italicized emphasis added.)

By specifying Luke 21, rather than Matthew 24 or Mark 13 which are parallel chapters, Ellen G. White was focusing on a specific prophecy in Luke concerning Jerusalem which the other two gospel writers did not. All the synoptic writers - Matthew, Mark and Luke - call attention to the prophetic sign Jesus gave in regard to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, but only Luke records that Jesus also said - "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles (nations) until the times of the Gentiles (nations) be fulfilled" (21:24) This Ellen White wrote would signal the time "just prior" to Christ's return. This time we have reached. It is the "now" time for us!

This factor does not exclude an "oppressive" Sunday Law, but it does place it as an "International Sunday Law" rather than the emphasis on a "National" Sunday Law. In the same year - 1901 - Ellen White wrote:

The substitution of the false for the true is the last act of the drama. When this substitution becomes universal, God will reveal Himself. When the laws of men are exalted above the laws of God, when the powers of earth try to force men to keep the first day of the week, know that the time has come for God to work. He will arise in majesty, and will shake terribly the earth. (R&H. April 21, 1901) (Grotheer's underscored emphasis.)

Observe this statement carefully. Note and retain in memory the words - "exalted" and "substitution." We will see them again in use. Carefully consider that the final issue is not some "Sunday Closing Law" but a forcing by law the observance of "the first day of the week." At that point in time, God "will arise in majesty, and shake terribly the earth." (Italicized emphasis added.)

What persuasive power will overcome all "pluralistic" factors which now stand as a barrier to "oppressive" religious legislation? Observe carefully this paragraph from a letter written in 1893:

Fallen angels upon earth form confederations with evil man. In this age antichrist will appear as the true Christ, and then the law of God will be fully made void in the nations of our world. Rebellion against God's holy law will be fully ripe. But the true leader of all this rebellion is Satan clothed as an angel of light. Men will be deceived and will exalt him to the place at God. and deify him. But Omnipotence will interpose, and to the apostate churches that unite in the exaltation of Satan, the sentence will go forth, "Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning. and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her." (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 62)

It should be obvious that these two quotations - one written in 1901, and the other in 1893 following "a national Sunday Law" - end with a focus on the same point of time, a time when God "will arise in majesty" thus interposing His "Omnipotence." The future "oppressive" Sunday Law coincides with the deification of Satan by the "apostate churches." In the final drama, it is to be a universal Sunday Law originating at the instigation of Satan as "an angel of light." (Underscored and italicized emphasis added.)

[In this schema of events as portrayed by Ellen G. White, one obtains the answer as to the decision made in the Sanctuary when the Church was weighed in the balances. For many it will be too late. She wrote commenting on Ezekiel 9 - "Here we see that the church - the Lord's sanctuary - was the first to feel the stroke of the wrath of God." (5T:211) The "first stroke" is upon those that "had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image." (Rev. 16:2) (Underscored emphasis added.)

The issue is far more than "a national Sunday Law" for many of those "who profess to keep the Sabbath" will not be "sealed." (5T:213-214) And if one is not sealed with the seal of God, with what is he marked? But today, Satan is using his agents to profiteer and to deceive concerned Adventists in agitation over a National Sunday Law issue instead of studying the Writings as to "time and place."] (Italicized emphasis added.)

Interestingly, Ellen G. White places the setting of the "oppressive" Sunday law in the context of Luke 21:24. She wrote:

After the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations [in other words, the times of the nations was fulfilled], every conceivable power of evil will be set in operation, and minds will be confused by many voices crying, "Lo, here is Christ, Lo,

Page 3

he is there. This is the truth, I have a message from God. He has sent me with great light." Then there will be a removing of the landmarks, and an attempt to tear down the pillars of our faith. A more decided effort will be made to exalt the false Sabbath, and to cast contempt upon God himself by supplanting the day He has blessed and sanctified. This false Sabbath is to be enforced by an oppressive law. (R&H, Dec. 13, 1892) (Original underscored emphasis; italicized emphasis added.)

This prophetic warning, again written after a National Sunday Law, can serve several purposes. It not only tells us about the nature of the coming "oppressive" Sunday Law, but also alerts sincere seekers of truth as to what they face in this "now" time of the fulfilled prophecy of Luke 21:24. (Italicized and underscored emphasis added.)

First, let us note in passing the "red" alert this warning gives. One has only to mark the date of the complete fulfillment of Luke 21:24 in 1980 when Jerusalem was proclaimed by the Knesset of Israel to be the Capital of its government, to see that after that date there came on the periphery of Adventism, the "many voices" as foretold. Ellen G. White indicated these "voices" would be confusing voices which would deceive. Ask yourself when you listen to tapes sent to you, when did that voice begin its ministry, or when you receive a newsletter, check the date of first publication of that journal or paper, and you will have a key that will keep you from deception no matter how good it looks or sounds.

We need to consider next the implications of the words describing the nature of the "oppressive" Sunday Law which is to occur in this "now" time. It states that there will be a "more decided effort to exalt the false Sabbath, and to cast contempt upon God Himself by supplanting the day He blessed and sanctified." Now go back to the reference from the Review & Herald, April 21, 1901, (p. 2) and compare these same words, and the synonym used for "supplanting" - "substitution." It should be obvious that these two quotations are referring to the same Sabbath law that is to be enacted. (Underscored emphasis added.)

While we do not believe in verbal inspiration, nevertheless words give thought as perceived by the writer. In the paragraph preceding the one quoted from the Review and Herald, Dec. 13, 1892, Ellen G. White speaks of -Sunday as a "rival Sabbath," a "spurious Sabbath." But "after" the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all "nations," this rival and spurious Sabbath is "exalted" and made to "supplant" the true in seeking to cast contempt upon God. Supplant means "to take the place of and serve as a substitute for especially by reason of superior excellence of power." Thus the exaltation leads to supplanting. There is an interesting calendar in use today in various parts of the world which alters the arrangement of the week, and gives to Sunday the place which God assigned for the true Sabbath - the seventh day. (See page 4)

The details of the future are not open before us, and will be known only as the scroll unfolds. Today, we can see only the broad outlines. However, one has only to do a minimum of thinking to grasp the implications if this calendar form should become universal, and a world-wide law were enacted enforcing the observance of the seventh-day as outlined in this calendar. Do not forget there are forces within society today who would return to such "Sabbath regulations." See WWN XX-6; "Now You Can Hear the Thunder".

The concept from Puritanism giving to Sunday the status of the seventh-day Sabbath and robing "the Lord's day" with the sanctity of the Sabbath is firmly held by the Lord Day Alliance. The cover of Sunday (Jan./March, 1989), the official organ of the LDA in the United States, reads - "May God's JOY of the Sabbath Enter Your Heart THIS SUNDAY!" Of import is the theology of Pope John Paul II on this point. During his 1987 visit to the United States, the Pope observed concerning Sunday:

Today is Sunday: the Lord's Day. Today is like the "seventh day" about which the Book of Genesis says that "God rested from all the work he had undertaken." (Gn 2:2) Having completed the work of creation, he "rested." God rejoiced in his work; he "looked at everything that he had made, and found it very good." (Gn 1:31) So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy" (Gn 2:3).

On this day we are called to reflect more deeply on the mystery of creation, and therefore our own lives. We are called to "rest" in God, the Creator of the universe. Our duty is to praise him: "My soul, give thanks to the Lord ... Give thanks to the Lord and never forget all his blessings." (Ps. 102 (103):1-2) Quoted in Sunday, op. cit, p.23)

How then can we relate to the present agitation for Sunday Closing Laws that have become issues in some parts of the world? To Be Continued

(Part Three)

There is not a single Sunday Closing Law on the statute books of the various states of the United States of America with which one observing the Sabbath would be troubled unless there are some remnants of the Puritan Blue Laws remaining from the Colonial Period. Even if the present Sunday Closing laws should be rigidly enforced, one who would make adequate use of the preparation day would find no trouble living through till Monday. In other words, the current Sunday Closing Law agitation in Puerto Rico is not the enforcement of an oppressive law against those who desire to observe the Sabbath of the Ten Commandments. To exploit the issue whether its being agitated in Puerto Rico, or elsewhere, as a means of soliciting for personal promotion, is as questionable as the Sunday laws.

As to whether the attempt to enforce an antiquated Sunday Closing Law in Puerto Rico is a harbinger of things to come remains to be seen. Jose A. Fuste, Judge of the U.S. District Court has refused to stay his ban on the enforcement of the Closing law while the Commonwealth appeals his decision to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the case should go to the Supreme Court, it must be remembered that, that Court in 1961 approved Sunday laws which were on the statute books of both Maryland and Pennsylvania. (See Bible Students, Source Book, Commentary Series, articles #1669 & #1670) The process of appeal should be closely watched.

The San Juan Star reported that the Speaker of the Commonwealth's House of Representatives has altered his position and is now favoring a referendum. (Feb. 23, 1989) If this approach is used in seeking a settlement that has stirred Puerto Rico, then a very favorable opportunity presents itself for witnessing to the truth. We have been advised that "we should seize upon circumstances as instruments by which to work." (Ministry of

Page 2

Healing, p. 500) Much time and many precious opportunities have already been lost by prostituting the issue for personal ends.

In suggesting what can be done, we speak from personal experience of meeting "head-on" a Sunday referendum. At mid-century two non-related events combined to electrify the city of Toronto, Ontario. The referendum over the Lord's Day Act of Canada produced "the largest vote in the city's history" for the 1950 civic elections. (The Globe and Mail, Jan. 3, 1950, p. 1) Two months prior to the election, Philip Carrington, Anglican Archbishop of Quebec, at a service in Toronto commemorating the 400th anniversary of the Church of England prayer book, remarked that "'the Bible commandment says on the seventh day thou shalt rest. That is Saturday. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday.' Tradition, he said, made it a day of worship." (Toronto Daily Star, Oct. 26, 1949, p. 3) This statement combined with the agitation over the upcoming referendum to liberalize the Canadian Lord's Day Act so as to permit Sunday sports from 1 to 6 p.m., opened the door to an opportunity to seize upon circumstances to proclaim truth. (See p. 3 for full article as it appeared in the Star. Also it has been copied into the Bible Students' Source Book, op. cit., art. #1605.

In consultation with the Board of Elders of the First Church, we decided to move to the forefront of the issue even though this was not the usual Sunday closing law, but rather an attempt to open up Sunday that was tightly closed. We also recognized that it would appear that we were allied with the commercial sports interests, as well as other less desirable elements who wished to take advantage of a more open Sunday. We believed that this could be offset by making this strictly a religious issue. It was decided to offer $1,000 for a Bible text commanding the observance of Sunday; however, we would seek to address the issue of the observance of Sunday in honor of the resurrection.

On Sabbath morning when the plan was presented to the church, the response was enthusiastic. I asked the congregation if they were willing to put their money in what was their belief. In less than three minutes they committed themselves to over $2,000. There was no doubt in their minds, it would be returned to them without loss.

One of the brothers of the Church had a Jewish solicitor who freely drew up the offer so as to meet the legal requirements of the Province of Ontario. The money committed had been made quickly available and we set up a trust fund in the Canadian Bank of Commerce. We drew a certified check from the fund, and published the same in the metropolitan newspapers. (See copy, p. 4) This brought an immediate response both with news items in the three Toronto daily's, as well as telephone calls. (See page 4, for the news item in the Globe)

The interest became so great that the Conference assigned Elder O. B. Gerhart to come to Toronto to assist in personal follow-up contacts. Elder Gerhart at the time was the field representative of the Conference Bible correspondence school. Elder 0. J. Ritz, pastor of the Montreal church also came to assist until the pressure was eased. The church parsonage was temporarily turned into a "motel." My wife got little done except answer the telephone and care for immediate needs.

Besides the published offer, we had begun a series of Sunday night Bible Lectures which were scheduled to end just before the time of the election. The first one was held in the sanctuary of the Church, but it was evident that we could not accommodate the interest. The lectures were transferred to the Canadian Legion Auditorium which was located in the heart of the city. We did not seek to camouflage our subjects as is frequently done in evangelism. The discussion of the Sabbath question was forthright. (See page 5 for sample of advertising.) Simultaneously, we also ran a series of brief studies in the newspapers which parallel the lectures on Sunday night. (See pages 5 & 6)

The religious advertising was heavy in the Saturday editions of the metropolitan papers for December 17, 1949. The churches were urging the electorate to vote - "No" - on the issue of freeing Toronto from the restrictive Lord's Day Act of Canada. But among the three full pages of advertising was our announcement of the final lecture. It read - "Why Christians Should Vote 'Yes'" (See p. 6) As I unlocked the door on our return from the lecture, the telephone was ringing. The editor of the city desk for The Globe and Mail was calling to ask me to summarize what I had said at the Auditorium. What I said along with the observations by an Anglican and United Church minister were published the next day. (See page 7) This was picked up by the Canadian Press and

Page 3

flashed across Canada. We received clippings from major city newspapers in Western Canada. One never knows how far reaching will be the witness until he seizes upon the circumstance which presents itself.

The vote of the electorate favored the opening up of Sunday for commercial sports. The Globe and Mail noted - "Gauged by the opposition the Sunday question met during pre-election campaigns, the result of the plebiscite could only be classed as an upset." (Jan. 3, 1950, p. 1) Of course the Jewish population and the Adventists received the blame for the results of the vote. Actually the referendum was to ask the Mayor and City Council to seek legislation from the Ontario government which would exempt the city from certain restrictions of the Lord's Day Act. This opened a broader field for a witness to the true Sabbath.

Reaction

We received reaction to this forthright presentation of the Sabbath both from within the Church and from other religious groups in the city of Toronto. The latter was expected but not the former.

In Oshawa, Ontario, is located not only the local and Union Conference offices, but also the publishing house and college for Eastern Canada. The, press not only published literature for the Church, but also did commercial printing, which included some business accounts in the city of Toronto. Other business contacts in the city were prime donors for the annual soliciting campaign known then as "Harvest Ingathering." The result was pressure was brought to bear on the conference president, Elder G. Eric Jones, to stop the program of the First Church over the Sunday issue lest these commercial accounts and Ingathering donations be placed in jeopardy.

Elder Jones, one of the most understanding administrators with whom I ever worked, suggested that we place in the metropolitan papers a statement clearly defining our position in the "open" Sunday referendum. This we did. (See p. 7) This seemingly mollified the opposition originating from Oshawa although a few local members continued to complain about what was going to happen to their Ingathering donations the next year.

Only one person came before the Reward Committee to present a text for a claim of the $1,000. The text upon which he based his claim was Psalm 118:24, which though in a Messianic context has no bearing on the Sabbath question. The Dean of the Central Baptist Seminary responded to the offer in a letter. He wrote:

I see by the papers that you are offering a thousand dollars reward. Why do you not offer it for what you use to offer it, namely, to disprove your contention that Constantine changed the Sabbath? If you offer it for that, I will take you up, or have you backed down on this.

To this we replied:

In regard to your letter of December the 7th, let me state first that the official position of the church relative to Constantine has always been that he made the first civil Sunday law. This is in keeping with the statement found in Schaff's Church History, third period, per. 75, p. 379 ff., where he states, "Constantine is the founder, in part at least, of the civil observance of Sunday by which alone the religious observance of the church could be made universal and could be properly secured."

At no time, to my knowledge, has an official of the Seventh-day Adventist Church ever offered one thousand dollars to anyone who could prove that Constantine did not change the Sabbath, in fact, Mr. Brown, the Sabbath cannot be changed by any man. Man can only think to change "times and laws". (Dan. 7:25)

Our offer is in keeping with the spirit of Father Enright's offer which first appeared in 1899. All similar offers since that time, by Father Enright himself, again in 1905, the Church of God, and ministers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church have been in a similar vein. Our offer this time is to get the issue down to the basic fact - "Is there a specific command by Jesus, or His Apostles, setting aside the first day of the week as a holy day, in honor of the resurrection?" To this we say there is none. Can you prove otherwise?

Another very interesting reaction was found in the "Personal" column of the Telegram on November 18, 1949. (Keep in mind that the Sunday night lectures were transferred to the Canadian Legion Auditorium on 22 College St., November 13th.) The "personal" message read - "Joe, you cannot change your mind after you commit suicide. Try finding God first. Meet Him Sunday evening, Legion Hall, 22 College St. Betty." Here is a clear indication that one can present doctrinal truth, yes, even the Sabbath, in such a way that the Spirit of God can take possession of the message and souls can be convicted of the hope that is in Jesus Christ.

One small negative editorial appeared in the Telegram directed at the Reward Offer. It read:

Not Germane

Dogmatic challenges as to the scriptural accuracy of observing Sunday as the Sabbath are foreign to the issue in the commercialized Sunday sports question. The belief of minorities who hold that this is not a holy day is respected, and they may observe whatever day in the calendar they desire. But where no harm is done and no injustice inflicted minorities may well desist from opposing a custom and practice which the community generally accepts and regards as sacred. (Dec. 16, 1949)

Here the question is raised - Can the thinking of the community at its highest point of vision be challenged? Christ left the throne of Heaven to do just that. It was daring, and it was costly. Can His disciples do anything less?

*****

Article from the Toronto Daily Star, Wed. Oct. 26, 1949

Sunday is kept holy by Christians, not because there is any Scriptural injunction but because there are religious traditions associated with that day among Christians, Protestant and Catholic spokesmen said today. They were commenting on a statement of Most Rev. Philip Carrington, Anglican Archbishop of Quebec, that there is no commandment which states Sunday must be kept holy.

RABBI'S RECOLLECTIONS

A rabbi recalled that the first Christians were Jews and celebrated the Sabbath on the last day of the week and it was not until the reign of the Emperor Constantine that the day was changed by Christians.

At a service commemorating the 400th anniversary of the Church of England prayer book, Archbishop Carrington recalled that "the Bible commandment says on the seventh day thou shalt rest. That is Saturday. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday." Tradition, he said, had made it a day of worship.

A spokesman for St. Augustine's, the Roman Catholic seminary for the diocese of Toronto, said: "Strictly speaking, that archbishop is correct. There is no scriptural rule for the observance of Sunday. But he doesn't go far enough.

EVIDENCE IN THE BIBLE

"In the Bible, there is evidence that Christ established a church, to carry on his work. He gave that Church authority to carry out God's rule on earth. Because the resurrection occurred on Sunday, and because of the general acceptance today of Sunday as a day of rest, it's fitting that now Sunday should be observed instead of Saturday, as under the old rule."

The Church has a specific church commandment stating Sunday should be observed.

Protestants observed Sunday because for many centuries they had been part of the Roman Catholic Church, and had observed the church commandment, he said.

"There is no specific command in the New Testament about which day shall be kept holy," said Rev. G H. Dowker of Grace Church-on-the-Hill. "The simple fact is, we keep holy the first day of the week because it was the day of the resurrection of Christ."

Rev. Northcote Burke of Christ church, Deer Park, said he thought the archbishop used the statement merely to illustrate church tradition. "Certainly the tradition of the Sabbath has always been to keep the Lord's day on the first day of the week. The early Christians used it because it was the day Christ arose again."

JESUIT GIVES HIS VIEW

"Our Lord rose from the dead on the first day of the week," said Father Hourigan of the Jesuit Seminary. "That is why the church changed the day of obligation from the seventh day to the first day of the week. The Anglicans and other Protestant denominations retained that tradition when the Reformation came along."

Rabbi David Monson, of Beth Sholom synagogue, said the change was made because of Emperor Constantine. "He changed the Christian Sabbath to Sunday," he said. "The original Christians were all Jews. They celebrated the Sabbath on Saturday."

Rev. W. H. Grotheer of First Seventh Day Adventists church, Awde St., said he agreed with Archbishop Carrington's statement. He explained Adventists still observe Saturday as the sabbath, in harmony with the fourth commandment which says "Six days shalt thou labor but the seventh day is the Sabbath." Mr. Grotheer recalled "Jesus rose on the first day (of the week) according to Mark 16:9 and in Luke 23:56 it definitely states the day before the resurrection is the Sabbath according to the fourth commandment."

Rev. Herbert Delaney, speaking for the chancery of the Roman Catholic diocese of Toronto, agreed that under the old rule of the Scriptures, the Sabbath was the holy day. But he said Sunday was observed under a specific commandment of the Church, after the coming of Christ, in an interpretation of the original commandment.

Father Delaney said the reason for the change from Saturday to Sunday under the new rules was that Christ had risen on Sunday.

NOT ONLY TRADITION

Dr. E. Crossley Hunter of Trinity United church said the explanation lies not only in tradition, but also in records of the New Testament. "Again and again in the New Testament we find reference to the Lord's day as the first day of the week whereas in the Old Testament it refers to the seventh day," he said. "However, the archbishop is quite right in the literal meaning of the commandment."

How all this might affect the debate in Toronto on the open or closed Sunday could not easily be determined. Dr. George Webber, of the Lord's Day Alliance, was out of town and Con. Leslie Saunders, one of the staunchest supporters of the closed Sunday, was also away.

One minister remarked: "We've become so accustomed to keeping Sunday as our holy day that it isn't likely this belated discovery is going to change our attitude overnight. Certainly not in Toronto."

Page 4

Reward of $1,000 for anyone who can show from the Bible that Sunday is the holy day in honor of the Resurrection was offered by the Seventh Day Adventist Church board here yesterday.

'The official offer reads as follows:

"The undersigned offer to pay a total of $1,000 to any person a persons who can show from the Bible alone (King James Version} a single text where Christ or His Apostles specifically commanded the observance of the first day of the week (Sunday) in honor of His Resurrection." (Signed) W H. Grotheer, B.A.; Dr. E. A. Crawford, M.D.; Monte W Myers.

Proof is to be presented in writing any Wednesday evening, from 7 to 8 p.m. until the offer expires Jan. 15.

"The issue is that if Sunday is not the holy day for Christians there is no more reason for them to oppose sports on Sunday than there is for them to vote legislation to stop sports on Wednesday," said Mr. Grotheer, chairman of the committee.

Seven Day Adventists observe the seventh day of the week, Saturday, as their Sabbath, in harmony, they say, with the fourth commandment.

"We do not want a law which would compel men to worship on Saturday. We maintain that all men should be able to worship, or not to worship God, according to the dictates of their Consciences.

"For this reason we are voting yes in the coming referendum to hasten the day when blue laws shall no longer bind freedom which the Cross of Christ granted to all men - freedom of choice," said Mr. Grotheer.

Page 5

The Telegram, Wednesday, December 21, 1949, p. 13.

Q. - Against what must all doctrine be checked?

A. - To the LAW and to the TESTIMONY: if they speak NOT ACCORDING TO THIS WORD, it is because there is no light in them. Isa. 8:20.

Q: - Did Jesus give specific injunctions concerning things which had not been previously commanded?

A: - Yes. Ye commanded baptism: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, BAPTIZING them." Matt. 28: 19. He commanded the communion service. "This DO in remembrance of Me." Luke 22.19. He commanded feet washing: "I have given you an example that YE SHOULD DO as I have done to you." John 13:15.

Q: - Did Jesus give a specific command for Sunday worship?

A: - There is NONE in the Bible! NOTE: - Since Christ did give specific commands concerning Christian practices, is it therefore unreasonable to ask for a Bible command for Sunday from those who are professing to follow a plain "Thus saith the Lord"?

Q: - If Sunday observance is ot commanded by Jesus, on whose authority does it rest?

A: - The authority of man.

Q: - How does God look upon worship based on the commandments of men?

A: - "In VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Matt. 15:9.

Q: - Upon whom is a blessing pronounced?

A: - "Blessed are they that DO HIS COMMANDMENTS, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter into the gates into the city." Rev 22.14.

Q: - What day will be observed in the New Earth?

A: - The Sabbath day - See Isa. 66:22-23. NOTE: If in the new earth, all flesh will worship on the Sabbath Day, is it not advisable for Christians to establish heavenly customs, as they live as strangers and pilgrims here below? Heb. 11:13. Let us enter into the observance of that Day which Christ created, gave in the Law, and observed while on earth, even the 7th day Sabbath.

You are invited to worship in SPIRIT and in TRUTH with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, 3 Awde St., Toronto. Each Sabbath (Saturday) at the hour of worship - 11 a.m. Address all correspondence to Mr. W. H. Grotheer.

Page 6

Page 7