Open Letter to the Ambassadors to the United Nations
This open letter sent on January 12, 2026, to the ambassadors to the United Nations explains the threat to religious liberty posed by church-state alliances.
An Open Letter to the Ambassadors to the United Nations and to their citizens.
A request to facilitate the termination of the alliance of the Seventh-day Adventist Church with the United Nations.
Date: January 12, 2026
To: H. E. _____
Permanent Mission of _____ to the United Nations
New York
From: Faithful Members of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist Church
Your Excellency,
We write to you out of deep respect for your office and for the grave responsibility borne by those entrusted with the governance of nations. We write this letter to warn you of a growing threat to the sovereignty of your country and all the UN member states.
The UN is fundamentally a Western institution founded to govern the conduct of nations. It exercises moral, political, and legal influence over both the external and internal affairs of nations. It was founded by the great powers of the West, and was the culmination of the development of Western values. Western history reveals an inherent weakness of Western governments. A weakness that appears to be ready for exploitation, this time, against all the world’s governments.
True freedom has been rare throughout human history. This is true of the West as much as anywhere else. In the West, despotism has usually taken the form of a union of church and state. Once such a union is formed, both institutions—church and state—inevitably cooperate to suppress internal dissent, whether religious, philosophical, political, or economic. History confirms that a union of church and state formed the foundation of all European tyranny prior to the rise of communism and its socialist children.
In contrast, freedom is fundamentally the child of Christianity. But not any form of Christianity. Freedom is fundamentally the gift of Protestant Christianity. In the 17th Century, two major developments in the West brought about freedom, both personal freedoms and national freedom, or state sovereignty.
The first development came from a Protestant Puritan turned Baptist minister, Roger Williams, who founded the first modern free society in Rhode Island. His government was based upon the principle that all individuals were granted freedom from our Creator in matters of religion and conscience. Therefore, he established the strict separation of church and state. His political philosophy was founded on Christ’s words, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s,” Matthew 22:21, and Christ’s statement to Pontus Pilate that, “My kingdom is not of this world,” John 18:36. Accordingly, the state should have nothing to do with matters pertaining to God, and the church should not interfere with secular matters of state.
The second development arose out of the religious wars of the Reformation, culminating in the Peace of Westphalia. The Peace of Westphalia was based on the same Biblical principles of freedom that Roger Williams espoused, applied to states rather than individuals. Westphalia established the nation-state system in the world today, replacing the Holy Roman Empire, which was jointly ruled by the Holy See and the Emperor. While Westphalia did not establish internal religious liberty as Roger Williams had in Rhode Island, it was a very important step in that direction, as it recognized religious liberty for individual states, thus creating state sovereignty. Westphalia established the first system of international law that recognized that religious diversity was a permanent political reality. Pope Innocent X issued a papal breve, Zelo Domus Dei, condemning the Peace of Westphalia, declaring the treaties “null, void, invalid, unjust, damnable, reprobate, inane, and without force or effect.” Understandably, as the Peace of Westphalia excluded the Holy See from ever assuming the role of supreme arbiter of the political order of Europe and from all diplomatic authority.
The great beacons of liberty, including John Locke, Benjamin Franklin, William Penn, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, were all the progeny of the Protestant pastor Roger Williams and the Protestant Reformers and soldiers who gave the world the Peace of Westphalia. These men, following principles laid down in the Bible and championed by the Protestant Reformation, recognized that religious liberty and freedom of conscience were granted by the Creator, as well as life and all of its legitimate pursuits, and were therefore inalienable and not the creation or gift of a monarch or a state. The legacy of these men is the freedom and sovereignty humanity enjoys today, instead of a universal empire.
The French Revolution closely followed the American Revolution and was greatly influenced by the Americans, but differed in a number of fundamental principles. The French Revolution was a reaction against the union of church and state in France, specifically the Roman Catholic Church. In persecuting and outlawing the Catholic Church, the French established Atheism—a religion by another name. In outlawing religion, the French secured freedom but at the same time sowed the seeds of their own destruction. Unlike the American system, which recognized inherent, inalienable rights granted by God, the French system gave lip service to inherent rights but recognized them only if granted by the state, and thus could limit them at any time that suited the state’s purposes. Thus, state-granted rights were merely privileges, always subject to curtailment or revocation. This is the same political theory espoused in Article 29 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 18, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights adopted by the UN in 1976 provides a good example of a purported “right” to freedom of religion, where the exception to the right is so broad that the right is rendered illusory. Make no mistake, a political system that cannot tolerate religion and inalienable rights given by God will devolve into its own form of tyranny, as can be seen in the French Revolution’s progeny, such as the Soviet Union, other communist regimes, and various governments that suppress religion rather than provide for religious freedom. Most often, this first takes the form of restrictions on freedom of speech, but quickly evolves to limit other freedoms of religious adherents or political opponents.
Today, the UN facilitates and oversees global spiritual ecumenical projects. In doing so, it is uniting with religion. The union of church and state within the United Nations poses the same threat of empire and tyranny that the old union of church and state in medieval Europe was bound by. While it may seem beneficial to unite with religion to achieve stability and prosperity, when religion meddles in the affairs of state, religion always seeks her own goals and agendas. In the case of the UN, the most influential, preeminent religious body is the Holy See. It is the only religious organization with observer status, and is the most influential religious voice in the UN’s deliberative and administrative bodies. The Holy See is the lone holdover from Europe’s Ancien Régime, and opposed to the principles of the Peace of Westphalia. When there is a union of church and state, the tendency is for a universal empire, with the church being a tool of the capital of the empire to exert power over vassal states, particularly unwilling vassal states. The church is uniquely able to cross international borders with its influence. Ultimately, the church can and will use its power to dominate the political power. The history of Europe repeatedly demonstrates this. Today, the UN is in danger of repeating European history. Amazingly, with the same Papal authority in preeminence, exercising its influence over all other religions through the ecumenical projects of the UN and other powerful religious coalitions.
We are particularly concerned by the accelerating movement toward ecumenical religious coordination within UN structures. For numerous reasons in various parts of the world, there is a movement towards a universal Sunday observance. The international foundations of this have already been laid in many states by agreements made under the League of Nations and later adopted by the UN. Sunday sacredness is associated with Christianity, but it is never taught in the Bible; rather, it was established by the Roman Catholic Church and imposed by the Roman Empire as a mark of the Roman Catholic Church’s authority. The Biblical day of rest is the seventh day, established by God at the Creation for all mankind. Be certain, you will hear agitation for a global universal day of rest. But also recognize that any action taken by the UN or any state to enforce a day of rest—any day of rest—is a union of church and state, and fundamentally is the state doing the bidding of the church. Tyranny always seeks conformity and submission. Religion, when unified with political authority, has always proven to be a powerful instrument to coerce both states and individuals.
For the above reasons, we respectfully urge you to:
- Recognize that the union of church and state, particularly a union operating globally, constitutes a clear and present threat to personal liberty and state sovereignty.
- Assist in the safeguarding of liberty and your nation’s sovereignty by supporting the removal of Protestant churches where their members explicitly call for such a withdrawal, and to specifically assist the members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to withdraw from association with the UN, even though the bureaucracy of the Seventh-day Adventist Church may express a desire to stay.
It is essential to the freedom and sovereignty of all nations, including your nation, that free and independent Protestant churches exist to champion the principles of freedom and the separation of church and state. The members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, in agreement with true Protestants globally, affirm that liberty of conscience is not granted by governments, institutions, or international bodies. Freedom of conscience is endowed by God and must remain forever beyond the reach of political expediency or any governmental system. Any nation that denies this truth ultimately forges the chains of its own oppression.
We therefore respectfully appeal to you to stand on the side of freedom—freedom grounded in the principle of separation of church and state—and to assist us in preserving this liberty for future generations.
Should you wish to engage with us further on this matter or learn more about the history of the Biblical foundations of true political and personal liberty, we would welcome dialogue with you. We would also welcome any advice you could give us to help us realize our goal.
With respect and sincerity,
Joanna de Bruyn
James Desvallons
Tim Hayden
Mark LaRose
Dennis Page
William Pitt
Tim Rumsey
Conrad Vine
Jonathan Zirkle