Blue-grass blade., 1892-02-06

main in it; that ia, he came to look
upon the very calling as un-
worthy.
1t would not then be a matter
of surprise that Mr.. Moore at
tacks ministers, if he made, as the
ground of his attack that there
calling was unworthy. But this
is not the ground, and strange to
say, his position is the very OPP
posite of this, namely, that the
ministers themselves are unworthy
of their calling. His attacks upon
them are because they fail, in re.
fusing to support the Prohibition
party, to come up to that standard
of citizenship demanded by the
nature of their profession. If this
is not true, why is it that Doctors
and Lawyers are as such spared?
Why is it that this is the only
class of professional men who are
denounced, if it is not because
this is the only class, who, in
refusing to support his party, fall
short of the demands of their
avocations?
This sttack is not made because
they fall short as men, or citizens.
IF that were the case they would
not be singled out as preachers. If
that were the case every man who
refused to sign his petition, what
ever might be his business, might
expect to receive condign punish
ment; whereas none but ministers
are called to account. This is
good proof that, even in Mr..
Moore's own estimation, the call
ing of the ministers of Christ is a
very high and noble one: SO high
and noble that he who occupies it
is, by his position, placed in a
light whose brightness reveals, as
hideous, sins in him that, in others,
are errors of jugment, or products
of ignorance, or, at the very worst,
mitigable weakness.
This is most glaring incon-
sistency in Mr.. Moore. To look
upon the calling as too unworthy
to be in, and, at the same time to
hold those in it to the most rigid
account for falling to live up to
the exalted standard Of their voca-
ton, can not be reconciled.
One might think that the con-
sistency can be explained on the
ground that he classes the calling
of the minister and the business
of the bar-room keeper together,
and as waging.a war of extermi-
nation on both; that he denounces
the acts of the minister because
those acts are the natural outcome
of his superstitious profession as
much so as the acts of the saloon
man, are the outgrowth of his
business; that, as matter of fact,
the ministry is the worse of the
two; for they, from the very nature
of their business, preaching the
Bible, so blind and deaden coun-
try, that the existence of the sa-
loon and all other evils are made
possible; and that, before any re-
forms in society can be effected,
the superstitious calling, in whose
darkness they all flourish, must be
destroyed. If this were Mr..
Moore's position he then would
not condemn the ministry for be-
tiny- Inconsistent, but for being
consistent, for every deed would
accord with their trade. Besides
fsuch a position would put the
destruction of the church as the
chief aim of his paper, and neces-
sarily that of the saloon would
take a secondary place. And
though sometimes accused of
having this primary aim, it is not
true; for if / remember correctly,
he Indignantly disclaims ii, saying
that he would rather steal horses
as a business.
No one who knows Mr.. Moore's
perfect frankness and fearlessness
in the declaration of his mind,
could believe that he would put
forth a paper whose professed aim
was to establish Prohibition senti-
ments, knowing that hundreds OF
the lovers of the church will take
such a paper, but whose real aim,
the overthrow of the church, must
be kept secret and work as secret
leaven; thus, under the cloak OF
Prohibition entering families,
when, if the real aim was professed
every door would be closed, and
having entered keep up the dis
guise that it may remain long
enough to sap the foundations OF
his deepest convictions. / can say
truly that l do not believe that
such a purpose has ever influenced
him for a minute.
No: his aim is to destroy the
saloon. aud he feels that if minis
tiers whose very calling. should
make them the stoutest enemies
of the bar room and supporting il
in any way, it is next to impossi-
BILE to arouse others to the danger
Whose positions do not so emphat-
ically dictate their duty.
4 This, L conceive, is why, in hi
Prohibition paper, he cries aloud
and spares not.w
But any one can see that this
places b. t,nd doubt, the
radical inconsistency in hit
i deepest convictions. How is
it possible to reconcile that
conviction which forces him tc
quit the ministry, with that which
causes him to chastise ministers
for failing to come up to their high
Standard?
Now il ia far from my motive in