The Indianapolis journal., 1885-09-01
CHURCH AND PARTY,

The Methodist Church, as a religious organ
ization, is committed to the principle of pro-
hibition for the State and total abstinence for
the individual. But, while the church is
thus openly committed to the principle of
prohibition, the effort to hitch the church to
the third-party political prohibition move
ment has proven disastrous failure. Indeed
the attempt to enlist the Methodist Church in
party politics in any way-a thing that has
more than once been attempted--has always
been resented by the membership. The
Methodist Church stands for freedom of con-
science and liberty of action. In no COM
munion is there less priestly domination
Take the case of DR.. De La Matyr, in this city,
as an instance. No minister was more highly
regarded as a preacher Of the gospel; but
when he stepped from the pulpit to the po-
litical party platform as a candidate, he did
not take with him single friend or admirer
on personal grounds, while he lost much of
his power and influence. Take the
case of Rev. DIR. Leonard. He has been
an honored, and respected, and in
fuential minister of the Methodist Church
For that reason he was nominated by the
third party men, with the hope that he would
be able to draw to his support largely from
the membership of the church who SO justly
admired his work as preacher. But the
hope was blind one DR.. Leonard will not
be voted for by more than two or three of the
members of the particular church of which
he is now the pastor, while his candidacy has
disturbed the church generally and brought
trouble into the whole denomination.
1t will not be without value and interest to
note the attitude of some of the leaders of
the Methodist Church upon this point. All of
them strong Prohibitionists in personal belief,
what they have to say Of the political partisan
phase of the question must have much weight
AT Chautauqua this question was handed Rev.
DR.. Buckley, the distinguished editor of the
AtOW IOlh AoFOCdtCs 4o OuIiSlldt Uuu0f
obligation to identify himself with the Prohi-
bition partyG' To this "catch" DR.. Buckley
responded as follows:
''No man is under obligation to identify
himself with either party, unless he thinks
the cause is to be advanced by one of them
and then he is. A man is not obliged to sup
port any party. Do not allow any man to use
Il. Il LA - Ill l.
Vote according to your Judgment as honest
men. The man who undertakes to use your
church relations to compel you to vote accord
ing to his views has the spirit of Rome. You
stand or fall to your own conscience. Vote to
promote prohibition according to your honest
opinion of the best way to do it, regardless of
the opinions Of others"
The third-pa people got no comfort in
that reply Take another expression. DIR.
o. III. Warren is the editor of the Northern
Christian Advocate, which, though not one of
the official papers of the church, is still one
of the leading periodicals by reason of the
ability learning and high character of it's ed
itor. In last weeks Advocate DR.. Warren
talks as follows:
'fWe do not like to catechise our brother
editors. But we do want to ask few plain
questions, for our own enlightenment, of
those who speak with double voices concern
ing the license of the liquor traffic. Do you
really mean to say that free whisky is the pol
icy to which we are bound by the obligations
of principle and expeciency until such time
as we can suppress the traffic by statutory or
constitutional prohibition Now-pardon us
do not dodge that one question. We want
square answer. You tell your readers at
one time that the liquor traffic imposes a
heavy burden of public expense. Ycur charge
is only too true The enormous figures you
produce are indeed a fearful indictment against
the traffic, and We iAfer that you deem it