ATJ
THE best way to restore Sabbath observance, is to observe it. A good example will accomplish more in this direction than law or precept. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.1
THE Sabbath of the Lord is a gift: the man-made sabbath is an institution thrust upon the people by the force of civil pains and penalties. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.2
THERE are always plenty of men in the world who are willing to become lawmakers for other people and by their zeal in this to atone for their own shortcomings. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.3
THE “concert” of “Christian” Europe will evidently always remain a thing to be, judging from the length of time the would-be participants have been vainly trying to get in tune with each other. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.4
THE rights of a Christian do not include the prohibiting of other people from going contrary to his own religious belief or practice. His rights are not concerned by his religious belief. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.5
THERE are a great many more heathen in the United States than there are in Christians, determined by the Bible rule that all persons are heathen who do not know the Lord. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.6
THERE is a vast difference between being directed by the Lord, and being under the direction of some man who claims to speak for the Lord. We prefer to be guided by the Word of the Lord, interpreted by his Spirit. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.7
A DISPATCH from Rome says that “the pope has instructed the papal nuncio at Madrid to insist upon the clergy opposing Carlism and to urge the clergy to earnestly support the Spanish ministry and present Spanish dynasty.” And the pope and clergy of “the church” never have anything to do with politics, no never—well hardly ever, unless the interest of “the church” or something else demands it, and their own inclination justifies it. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.8
IF it be true that the government has a right to enact laws for the preservation of morality, is it also true that morality can change with every change of the government and its regulations? Since every government on the earth does change (and none more frequently than a republican government), and since morality does not change, how can the latter be properly a subject of governmental regulation? When human laws are altered, is there ever, in any case, an alteration of right and wrong?—Certainly not; and this is conclusive evidence that human legislation is not adapted to deal with right and wrong: or, in other words, with morality. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.9
ATJ
RELIGIOUS right is the greatest boon that ever was given, or that ever could be given, to men. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.1
That is the truth: and, being the truth, in the nature of things such a boon could come from God only. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.2
Religious right, as generally understood and as contemplated in these lines, is the right of every person to choose for himself in things religious without constraint of any kind from any person or source whatever. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.3
This freedom God has given to men, as is declared in the motto of the AMERICAN SENTINEL, in the words of the Lord Jesus, “If any man hear my words and believe not, I judge him not.” The right is given by the Lord to men, and is thus recognized by the Lord in men. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.4
This is illustrated in the transaction in the garden in Eden. The man was made in the image of God, to glorify God, yet left perfectly free not to do so if he should choose; and was left perfectly free to choose for himself whether he would or not. He was left as free to choose not to serve God as he was to serve him. AMS October 7, 1897, page 609.5
This freedom God gave to man, and recognizes in man; and it is this, more than anything else, that enables man to be really a man. Any person who would in any degree infringe this right of man aims a destructive blow at the dignity and the manliness of man, and at the honor and glory of God. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.1
Therefore it is to the honor and glory of God, and in the interest of the everlasting dignity and manliness of man, uncompromisingly to oppose every attempt in whatever degree to infringe or to disrespect the right of any person to choose for himself in all things religious—to choose for himself as to all religious beliefs, rites, customs, and practices. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.2
No State can ever have any shadow of right, by legislation or in any other way, to circumscribe the perfect freedom of every man to choose for himself whether he will regard or disregard any religious belief, or rite, or custom, or practice. And every man’s right utterly to disregard everything of the kind is as complete as it is to regard it. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.3
No church has any shadow of ground for condemning any man or any number of men who disregard everything which that church holds sacred. Every person has perfect right to disregard all that any church or all churches together believe or practice. The professed Christian church or individual who condemns or criticises or sets at naught any person for disregarding any religious belief, or rite, or custom, denies the God of Christianity. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.4
Loyalty to religious right does not consist in asserting our own right to be religious or not religious at our own unconstrained choice; but in the unswerving recognition of the right of the other man to be religious or not religious at his own personal and unconstrained choice. This is so plain that it must be recognized at once by every one. In the garden, God did not assert his own right to be religious for himself and other people too; that matter could take care of itself. But he did establish and recognize the right of the man to believe or not believe him, just as the man himself might freely choose. This he did again, in the divine motto of religious freedom, “If any man hear my words and believe not, I judge him not; for I came not to judge the world; but to save the world.” AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.5
This shows, too, that when one who is religious condemns one who is not religious for not being religious or for not believing what he preaches, he hinders the salvation of the one who does not believe. Then, religious friend, will you frustrate the salvation of men who do not believe, by bringing upon them your condemnation through denunciation from the pulpit, or the instrumentality of the police, the courts, and fines, and imprisonments? Will you not rather forever present to all people the winning blessing and grace of salvation, by recognizing his divine right not to believe and treating them all with the merciful and gracious consideration which the Lord has shown to the man whom he created? AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.6
Let every one who professes to believe in religious right show by his conduct that he really believes in it. Let the believing neighbor respect in Christian kindness, the unbelieving neighbor. Let the unbelieving neighbor respect in manly dignity the right which his believing neighbor exercises in choosing to believe. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.7
Let the believing wife respect her unbelieving husband, let her request his exercise of the right to choose for himself whether he will believe or not. Let the unbelieving husband in true manliness regard his believing wife’s exercise of the right to choose to believe. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.8
Let the believing husband respect the exercise of the right of choice not to believe. And let the unbelieving wife show that she believes in religious right, by respecting the choice of her husband to be religious just as he chooses. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.9
This will show that you do indeed believe in religious right, in religious freedom. But so long as you act any other way than this, your profession of believing religious freedom is a fraud. AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.10
Let the precious divine boon of religious freedom never be dimmed by the actions contradicting the words in those who profess to love it! AMS October 7, 1897, page 610.11
ATJ
THERE are two principles in the world by which human conduct is sought to be controlled,—love, and force. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.1
Love is the principle by which God works. The Bible tells us that “God is love,” and consequently, “love is of God.” Love is the highest principle of conduct that can exist. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.2
Force is a lower and altogether different principle. Force is employed by the enemies of God in seeking to make people act contrary to God’s will. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.3
Love acts upon the individual from within; force is applied to him from without. Love leads; force drives. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.4
Everything that God does is prompted by love. He cannot act from any other motive, for he “is love.” And God wants all his creatures to act from the same motive, and so to be like him. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.5
“God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him might not perish, but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.6
And Christ so loved the race that had fallen through Adam’s sin, that he willingly left all that he had in heaven, to live a life of humility and suffering here, and finally to die upon the cross for man’s redemption. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.7
As love moved God and his Son to do such wonderful deeds in serving us, so the Lord wants love to move us in doing high and noble deeds to serve him. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.8
God wants people to love him, and to love all that is pure and right and just. In this way, by planting this love in our hearts, he seeks to control our actions so that our lives will be upright. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.9
This way of controlling people does not in the least interfere with their personal freedom. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.10
But force, on the other hand, does interfere with personal freedom. It would not be effective if it did not. Force takes no account of the will or belief or the love of the person on whom it is brought to bear. It secures certain results touching the outward conduct of people, and this is all that it can do. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.11
Force is necessary in this world; but for what and for whom is it necessary? AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.12
It cannot make any person do right, nor is it necessary for good people. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.13
Love makes a person do right; and it is love in the heart that makes a person good. We know from the Bible that this must be so; and we can know it also from our own experience and the experience of others. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.14
The Bible says, “This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” 1 John 5:3. And also, “Love is the fulfilling of the law.” Romans 13:10. The one who keeps the commandments of God—who fulfils the law—does right. He is a good person. And also, since “God is love,” he who has love ruling in his heart has God there, and therefore has the goodness of God. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.15
Force is necessary to restrain evil-doers. A good person does not do the things that an evil-doer needs to be restrained from doing. He chooses to do right, not because there is a law against wrong doing, but because he loves what is right. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.16
Is a good person then without any law? No, indeed; he has the perfect law of God written in his heart. This is what gives him a love for the right. The law of man cannot be written in the heart and cannot give any person a love for the right. So the law of God is very much more effective to prevent wrong doing any an individual, if he will only receive it, than the law of man possibly can be. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.17
A person may keep the laws which are made by Congress and the legislatures, and yet not be a good person. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.18
For instance, he may not do any work on Sunday, because he is afraid that if he does he will be arrested and sent to jail, or punished with a fine. Or he may consider that it is good policy not to work on Sunday, in order to stand well with the people in the community. Is such a person any better for not working on Sunday?—Certainly not. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.19
And it would be the same if it were the seventh day—the Bible Sabbath—instead of Sunday. If he does not keep the Sabbath because he loves it,—because the love of God is in his heart,—it is of no benefit to him to go through the form of keeping it. He is not a good man, in the true sense of the word, and to refrain from work does not make him any better. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.20
Even the one who truly keeps the Sabbath does not become good by doing it, but he keeps it because he has become good already, by opening his heart to the love of God. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.21
Force cannot make any person do right, however fully he may yield to it; because it cannot touch the heart, which is the fountain head of all our actions. If the fountain head is not sweet, the stream will not be sweet. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.22
It may be walled in or dammed [sic.] up or restrained in any other way; but its condition of purity or impurity will not be changed by any such means. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.23
Force is to preserve rights. In doing this, its use is in harmony with the ordinance of God. But all along through the history of the world, from the time of Abel down to the end of the nineteenth century, some men have been using force to try to make them do right: or, rather, to make them do what these men thought was right. They have been using force to try to make people better, and so to secure their salvation instead of their destruction by the final judgments of God against sin. It is this that has caused the religious persecutions that have stained with blood so many of the pages of history. AMS October 7, 1897, page 620.24
In securing the preservation of rights, force is entirely proper; but in securing moral or right action it has no proper place; but the arch-enemy of God and man uses force—not to make men moral, for he hates morality; but to make them conform to some standard of morality which he himself has set up in opposition to God, and palmed off upon the world. And all who employ or advocate force to make people do right are really working in harmony with him. AMS October 7, 1897, page 621.1
Even if force were used to make people conform to the true standard of morality,—the law of God,—it would be contrary to God, for it is not God’s way. And the person upon whom it was used, instead of becoming better, would learn to hate instead of to love that law,—because he would see in it only an instrument of slavery to himself. AMS October 7, 1897, page 621.2