Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-04-03

one of his arms severely, ana IL was at
one time thought dangerously, cut. The
cutting was purely accidental, and the
little fellow is now out again.
Our Ministers ana Local Opfion-Thcv
should Not Preach On n.
To the Editor of the Dispatch:
The local option seems to be the ques-
ton of the hour, and is certainly en-
titled to fair consideration and just
treatment at the hands Of all. |, who
have been friend Of temperance all
my life, am anxious it shall receive
both at the hands of the people. |
greatly fear, however, that some indis-
cretions will be committed on both sides.
/ have read the proceedings Of the min
isters' meeting at the Second Baptist
church on Monday last, and published
in your paper of the 30th, and feel that
the third resolution adopted BY that
meeting is an indiscreet if not an un-
wise one. 1t is in the following words
While regarding questions political
as wholly unsuitable to the pulpit, we
shall not hesitate to inculcate upon our
congregations the duty of using the bal
lot as any other trust from God on
the side Of truth and righteousness"
This resolution does not refer in terms
to local option, but, taken III connection
with the two preceding ones, commits
the ministers Of that meeting to the
proposition of intoxicating upon their
congregations |" the duty of using the
ballot as any other trust from God on
the side OF truth and righteousness"
Of course, as represented in local op-
ton. This resolution is very much in
yolved. Its precise meaning is diff
ficult to ascertain, and the latter
part seems wholly inconsistent with
the former. If political questions are
unsuitable to the pulpit " how Is the
present local-option question, which is
as much political as the tariff, the gold
and silver, and the labor and capital
questions Of the day, to suitably find
its way into the pulpit: "Truth and
righteousness" are, TO say the least,
to some extent involved in all govern
mental and political questions. Sin
and vice are found closely connected
with other questions besides the making
and selling Of liquor.
Then the statement that the ballot IS
a trust from God is very indefinite, il
not confusing. If it is meant that all
the agencies for the government OF tao
peoples Of this world are trusts from
God. then the statement is true a. to
those peoples who are governed by the
ballot. But surely our ministers did
not intend such indefinite meaning. The
line Of argument that makes the
ballot in any special sense trust
from God would make liquor
equally trust from God, and as such
to he used and rot abused. God GER
tainly created the fruit and the grain,
and gave them their properties, from
which liquor is evolved and God GER
tainly created man, and endowed him
with those faculties Of mind which en-
abled him at very early period in the
worlds history to discover the pro-
cesses by which the properties in the
fruit and grain could be made to
take on the form Of liquor. And
as liquor results from the agencies
above referred to, and as God is the
author of those agencies, therefore
God is the bestower Of liquor as trust.
LIQUOR has been in the world much
longer than the ballot, and while its
abuse has been condemned all through
the Old and New Testaments, its de-
struction has never been commanded by
patriarch, prophet, the Christ" or an
apostle.
The Temperance " of the New Tes-
lament is not the local option" OF
to-day. Local option" is as purely
a political question as any other ques-
ton that iniringes upon the lives, liber-
ties, and wellbeing Of the people. II
our ministers mean to grapple with this
question, land | certainly do not deny
them the right to do so, indeed think
it their duty to DO so,) they should do
so as citizens, not as ministers. They
should present this question not to
their " congregations " from the sacred
pulpit, but to their owcitizens
from the hastings.
Let the pulpit remain where the
Saviour and his apostles left it-aboyc
ard beyond the reach either Of political
questions or political wrangles. Just
as surely as the pulpit is brought into
the political arena, so surely will il
be degraded and lose to some extent
that yeneration. respect, and affection
which our people now have for it.
Our ministers will find out before
very long, if they do not know it now.
that upon this local.option question
their congregations" are divided.
This being so, if the pulpit is to be
made a platform from which one side
is to be heard, can it be denied for
presenting the other side? The God
given ballot must be used on the side
of truth and iighteouness." But
which is the side:
Truthful men and righteous men
that is, piOus men--are at issue as Il
the side. Therefore the pulpit, if il
presents either side, must present boil
sides. so as to allow the "congrega
ton" to determine for themselves thu
side to which truth and righteousness
incline.
Mr. Jefferson said Error ceases t
be dangerous when truth is left free t
combat it," | believe it. There is I
power in truth, appealing to the heart
and consciences of men that cannot eve;
be aided by legislative enactments
Moral and intellectual forces were or
dained for the amelioration aud bette
governing of the world. and | hope Oh
ministers will always insist on thes
from the pulpit. | am anxious
for our ministers to exert upol
The popular mind the influence whct
should emanate from their sacred call
ing and pure lives. But am sure thi
influence will be impaired if on Sun
days in their pulpits. where there i
10 one to answer them. they max
local-option speeches and call Their
sermons. There is no reason for this
For whenever one os our minister
wants IN make n local. option sneerh