NOTE: This article is a revised version of an editorial piece published in the October 2024 edition of Michigan Memo, the official newsletter of the Michigan Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.
In the shifting terrain of 1880s America, the National Reform Association (NRA)[1] emerged as a voice determined to reshape the nation’s core values. Founded in 1864, the NRA’s bold mission was to embed the recognition of God’s sovereignty directly into the United States Constitution.
Their vision was revolutionary. The NRA sought to establish a Christian theocracy within America’s constitutional framework by amending the Constitution’s preamble, enshrining divine authority as the foundation of American governance. Their proposal left no ambiguity:
We, the people of the United States, [humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among the nations, his revealed will as the supreme law of the land, in order to constitute a Christian government,]... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America [2].
The NRA partly justified its efforts by framing them as a defense against secularism, which they believed was eroding the nation’s Christian character. In their view, the Constitution had been co-opted to shield anti-religious ideologies they saw as existential threats to Christianity. To counter this, they sought to amend the Constitution to prevent its use as a "shield and sword of irreligion, communism, atheism, and infidelity” [##3|Reverend D. McAllister, “The Aims and Methods of the Movement,” Proceedings of the National Convention to Secure the Religious Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1872.##].
Had this amendment succeeded, it would have fundamentally transformed American governance, shifting authority from the consent of the governed to the dictates of divine authority as interpreted by religious leaders. This would have challenged the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause [4], threatening to unravel the foundations of religious liberty and formally declare the United States a Christian nation, with the intent of weaving Christian laws, institutions, and practices into the nation’s legal and cultural fabric [##5|As alluded to by William Strong, then United States Supreme Court justice and president of the National Reform Association, “Call for a National Convention,” Proceedings of the National Convention to Secure the Religious Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1872.##].
These proposals overlooked a key principle: authentic faith cannot be born from religious legislation. For Christianity to genuinely resonate with nonbelievers, it is best nurtured in settings where individuals are free to choose faith—or not—based on the merits of Scripture and a God of love who desires sincere and voluntary devotion. Their approach ignored the Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom for all Americans and, if enacted, would have privileged Christianity, pressuring nonbelievers to conform to Christian practices without genuine conviction.
By the 1870s, the NRA expanded its mission beyond amending the Constitution [6], pushing for Sunday laws and Bible instruction in public schools to weave Christian doctrine into public life and governance. Their influence grew, gaining support from prominent political and legal figures [##7|”Officers of the National Association,” Proceedings of the National Convention to the Secure the Religious Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1872.##], including Supreme Court Justice William Strong who served as its president. Among its supporters were U.S. senators, governors, judges, and influential religious leaders from various Protestant denominations [##8|This would be an example of what Ellen White was referring to when she states in the book, The Great Controversy, p. 445: “When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions. . . . “##]. Their journal, The Christian Statesman, became a platform for advancing their ideas, sparking resistance from Seventh-day Adventists, who saw it as a direct threat to religious liberty.
The Adventist Response: Birth of the American Sentinel
The rising arrests for Sunday law violations [##9|Sunday laws were being agitated or had been enacted in states like Arkansas, Pennsylvania, and California, where in some cases Seventh-day Adventists were fined or imprisoned for violating Sunday laws. See, for example, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Oct. 27, 1885.##], coupled with the broader implications of the NRA’s agenda, spurred a number of Adventist leaders to action. In January 1886, they launched The American Sentinel [10], a publication that quickly established itself as a fierce defender of the Constitution as it stood, opposing any amendments to Christianize America. The Sentinel advocated for both civil and religious liberties and served as a vocal opponent of any efforts to unite church and state [11].
Ellen White, a prophetic voice within the Adventist church, recognized the critical importance of the Sentinel. In 1889, she praised its role as a “trumpet giving a certain sound,” rallying Adventists to the defense of religious liberty [##12|Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 719.##]. The publication was a crucial platform for articulating the Adventist position, warning of the profound dangers inherent in the NRA’s mission [13].
The NRA: Prophecy Fulfilled
To Adventists, the NRA’s campaign was more than a political movement—it was the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. G.I. Butler, then president of the General Conference, openly criticized the NRA’s push to amend the Constitution and enforce Sunday observance nationwide, viewing it as a direct fulfillment of the prophecy in Revelation 13 [##14|G.I. Butler, “Sunday Persecution,” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Oct. 27, 1885.##]—a prophecy that foretold the inevitable dangers of a church-state alliance:
All intelligent people know of the National Reform Association, which is assiduously engaged in trying to so amend the Constitution. . . as to give it a religious cast, that a law to enforce Sunday keeping throughout the whole country may be enacted [##15|”Sunday Persecution,” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Oct. 27, 1885.##].
Ellen White echoed this sentiment, urging Adventists to recognize the NRA’s efforts as a “plain, direct fulfillment of prophecy” [##16|White, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 719.##] and called upon them to “comprehend the situation” and show others “where we [were] in prophetic history” [##17|——Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 716.##].
She warned against complacency, emphasizing that while prophecy might imply the inevitability of such movements, Adventists could not afford to be passive. They were called to act—to pray, to advocate, and to resist the erosion of religious liberty as they faced an impending eschatological crisis. She said:
When the National Reformers began to urge measures to restrict religious liberty, our leading men should have been alive to the situation and should have labored earnestly to counteract these efforts [##18|——Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 715.##].
The NRA’s vision of a Christian America, achieved through constitutional amendment and legislative fiat, clashed fundamentally with the Adventist belief in the separation of church and state. While the NRA aimed to impose Christianity through government power, Adventists believed—and still do—that true conversion is to be achieved through persuasion and the work of the Holy Spirit, not by mere outward conformity to religious laws [##19|——For example, Ellen White states in the book, The Desire of Ages, p. 509: “Not by the decisions of courts or councils or legislative assemblies is the kingdom of Christ established, but by the implanting o Christ’s nature in humanity through the work of the Holy Spirit.”##].
Lessons Learned
The NRA’s push to embed Christian doctrine into the U.S. Constitution highlights the dangers of religion seeking political power. Although framed as a safeguard for morality, the true cost of merging church and state would have been the erosion of individual liberty. Religious belief is inherently personal—a sacred space for private conviction. When faith is legislated, it becomes something imposed rather than embraced, stripping it of its sincerity. As Adventists have long understood, faith cannot be imposed by law; it must be nurtured through personal conviction, a work of the Spirit, not the state. The pursuit of religious influence in government, while perhaps well-intentioned, threatens both democracy and the integrity of faith itself. When faith is compelled, it becomes mere compliance, and in that compliance, the essence of true Christianity is lost.
Ellen White keenly noted that past events have a way of resurfacing.
History repeats itself. The same masterful mind that plotted against the faithful in ages past is now at work to gain control of the falling churches, that through them he may condemn and put to death all who will not worship the idol sabbath [##20|White, Letters and Manuscripts, vol. 14, Manuscript 51, 1899.##].
The NRA’s coalition of Protestant denominations, seeking to use government authority to enforce religious observance was understood by our pioneers and Ellen White as a fulfillment of prophecy. While the NRA's ambitions never fully materialized, it offers a glimpse of what prophecy foretells: a future where entities representing Christian interests, perhaps with good intentions, unite to wield political power and influence politicians who share their beliefs. This threatens the personal freedom of all Americans, whether religious or secular. Protecting liberty requires constant vigilance against any erosion of the wall between church and state. Only then can faith remain a matter of personal conviction, untouched by government control.
The most momentous struggle of all the ages is just before us. . . Events which. . . the prophetic word declared to be impending are now taking place. . . Already the question of an amendment to the Constitution restricting liberty of conscience has been urged upon the legislators of the nation. . . . Any movement in favor of religious legislation is really an act of concession to the papacy. [##21|——Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 711.##]
REFERENCES
For a brief history regarding the National Reform Association, read, “National Reform Association,” in Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists by Edwin Cook. https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=A9UL#fn10.
2. Edwin Cook, “National Reform Association,” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists. https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=A9UL#fn5.
3. Reverend D. McAllister, “The Aims and Methods of the Movement,” Proceedings of the National Convention to Secure the Religious Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1872.
4. Congress.gov. Constitution of the United States. “First Amendment.” https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/.
5. As alluded to by William Strong, then United States Supreme Court justice and president of the National Reform Association, “Call for A National Convention,” Proceedings of the National Convention to Secure the Religious Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1872.
6. Anthony Cowley, National Reform Association, “From Whence We Came: A Background of the National Reform Association.” https://nationalreformassociation.weebly.com/history.html.
7. “Officers of the National Association,” Proceedings of the National Convention to Secure the Religious Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, Philadelphia, 1872.
8. This would be an example of what Ellen White was referring to when she states in the book, The Great Controversy, p. 445: “When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions. . .”
9. Sunday laws were being agitated or had been enacted in states like Arkansas, Pennsylvania, and California, where in some cases Seventh-day Adventists were fined or imprisoned for violating Sunday laws. See, for example, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Oct. 27, 1885.
10. Milton Hook, “The American Sentinel,” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists. https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=F8VD&highlight=american|sentinel.
11. See Office of Archives, Statistics, and Research to view, “The American Sentinel,” where its stated purpose and objectives can be found: https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Periodicals/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2fPeriodicals%2fAmSn&FolderCTID=0x012000DDAC5B94CFBD234AB142FC5C311C732700042C85EA7C1C1A4DB8D75C62A7517A6E.
12. Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 719.
13. Hook, “The American Sentinel,” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists. https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=F8VD&highlight=american|sentinel.
14. G.I. Butler. “Sunday Persecution,” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Oct. 27, 1885.
15. Ibid.
16. White, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 719.
17. Ibid, p. 716.
18. Ibid, p. 715.
19. For example, Ellen G. White states in the book, The Desire of Ages, p. 509: “Not by the decisions of courts or councils or legislative assemblies. . . is the kingdom of Christ established, but by the implanting of Christ’s nature in humanity through the work of the Holy Spirit.”
20. White, Letters and Manuscripts, vol. 14, Manuscript 51, 1899.
21. ——Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 711.
Andy Im is the Director of Communications and Religious Liberty for the Michigan Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and the Associate Director for the Center for Adventist Ministry to Public University Students near Michigan State University. Previously he served as a theology professor at Weimar University in California. His educational background includes degrees in political science and theology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Southern Adventist University, respectively.