The Washington herald., 1912-01-18

The severe cold last night did no
prevent the gathering of good audi
ence in Flynn's Hall, Eighth and ]
streets northwest, to hear Mr.. Alonz'
T. Jones discuss the subject of Re
ligious legislation for the District o
Columbia" He said:
That this matter may be clearly be
for your minds, IL will be proper 70
me to state the case.
For years there has been a persisten
and growing pressure to have reli'
Eious law enacted for the District o.
Columbia.
Religious legislation for the District
OF Columbia means religious legisla.
lion by the Congress of the United
States; for Congress is the Legislative
body of this District.
Congress has existence and legisla-
tive authority only by the National
Constitution.
That Constitution says that Con
gress shall make no law respecting an
establishment OF religion, or prohib-
iting the free exercise thereof"
Any legislation on the subject OF
religion prohibits the free exercise OF
religion. Any legislation in favor of
religion prohibits the free exercise of
that religion; for then the exercise OF
that religion must be according to stat
ute and judicial decision and not ac-
cording to the dictates Of conscience.
Therefore, religious legislation in
any and every phase or suggestion is
prohibited Congress by the Constitu-
tion And by the whole history of the
making of the Constitution, It is in
disputable that this is precisely what
was intended by the makers OF that
supreme law. and the intent of the
lawgiver is the law"
TO which refer. and to which I ask
your attention in this discussion, is
Sunday legislation.
I. with many others, affirm that Sun
day legislation is essentially and only
religious legislation.
Against this affirmation those who
urge upon Congress the enactment of
a Sunday law plead that such law
would not be religious.
This creates an issue. The burden
OF proof rests upon US who make the
affirmation. And ii is my pleasant oc-
cupaton tonight to present that
proof. And this is easy. because there
is not only abundance of proof, but it
is all on this one side of the question.
Origin and Character.
The first Sunday law in the world
was in an edict of Constantine, En-
peror of Rome, about the year Sl4,
which, according to Neander's para
phrase, provided and ordered that on
Friday and on Sunday there should
be a suspension of business at the
courts and in other civil oflces, so
that the day might be devoted with
less interruption to the purposes of de-
votion." And Sozomen says that Con-
stantine Commanded that no judicial
or other business should be transacted
on these days, but that God should be
zny ru~FeH
That puts IL beyond all question that
the express intent of the first legisIa-
tion ever in the world in behalf of
Sunday as a day of cessation from
common occupation was religious only.
And the intent of the lawgiver being
the law, that first Sunday law was re-
ligious only.
ton was in the edict of Constantine
A. d. 821. The scope of the law was
now extended to include not only the
courts and other state Offices, but also
the people residing in cities,T and
such as work at trades" And still
the intent was unqualifedly the same,
for Eusebius, the historian OF the time,
and one OF the bishops who had most
to do with the legislation, says of 1t
that Constantine Commanded, too,
that one day should be regarded as a
special occasion for religious worship.
In positive expression of the contin-
ued religious intent in the law, Con-
stantine, as the interpreter of his own
law. caused to be drawn up a prayer
to be repeated in concert every Sunday
by the imperial troops at a given sig
nal, as they were paraded for the pur-
pose.
1t is, therefore, impossible fairly to
deny or to ignore that this law was
definitely religious. And in addition
to this, there is the evidence that 1t
was exclusively religious. This evi-
dence is again in the words Of Bishop
Eusebius, saying that Constantine
commanded the nations inhabiting the
continents and islands OF this mighty
globe to assemble weekly on the Lords
day and to observe II as a festival. not
indeed, for the pampering of the body,
but for the comfort and invigoration
OF the soul by instruction in divine
truth"
That statement not only shows that
law to be religious, but it
shows that IT was religious to the ex-
clusion Of every temporal, civil, or
consideration.
In confirmation of all this, there is |
the further fact that It was by his Of |
fee and authority as Pontfex MaSimus |
the head Of religion. and not as EN- |
perOr-the head Of the state, that Con-
stantine issued his Sunday edicts. For. |
says Duruy, In determining what days |
should be regarded as holy. and in the |
composition Of a prayer for national |
use. Constantine exercised one Of the |
rights belonging TO him as Pontffex |
Nfaximus, and IL caused no surprise |
that he should do this"
Yet. beyond all this is the fact that |
II was the church federation of the |
time that was the secret spring, the |
Inspiration, the initiative, and the |
agency by which It was all brought |
about. 1t was all only in the further
snce OF the grand scheme of the bish-
BPS and their church combine to estab- |
ish the state as the kingdom OF God" |
And when they had accomplished their
iesign. they proclaimed that The king |
iom' and that the enforcement of these |
II the Most High had taken the king
iom, and that the enforcement of these /
md kindred laws made the people "fit /
subjects Of the kingdom"
That is the true story, as il is the
,nly story. of the origin Of Sunday leg
Station. That is the sole and exclusive
character OF Sunday legislation in its
,rigin. That character is solely and
religious. It has no hint
n SAVIOR of any other character than
eligious. And TO the end of the world
hat character never can be separated
rom Sunday legislation. s
Indeed, through all the ages follow
ng that origin, there was no attempt,
10 thought even, to give to Sunday leg
Station any other than that exclusively
eEgious character, until these pres
nt-day attempts in the United States
0 sustain Sunday legislation against
he American, constitutional, and Chris
ion principle OF complete separation
z religion and the state nroread |