The Saint Paul globe., 1900-05-06

ing. 1t Is true that the muscles of the
body are exercised and streng thened by
such sports. but 1t is equally true that
the higher forms of card playing afford
| valuable exercise for ;the mind.
The fact is that card games are asso-
ciated in the popular mind with gam
bling and the saloon back room, and IN
the early days of Methodism this impress
sion was deeply rooted in the minds Of
the fathers and mothers Of the church.
There are many others than Methodists
who have deep-rooted aversion to cards
and card playing for the same reason.
The card game in the home or in some
other persons home is regarded as step
towards card playing in less desirable
places and to gambling
Holding this ineradfcable prejudice, as
SO many Methodists do. 1t is not sur
prising that the general conference Of the
Methodist Episcopal church, now in ses-
sion at Chicago, has declined to remove
from the rules of the church the pro-
! hibition Of card playing. And it must
be admitted that it would have been
dangerous and perhaps destructive to
the church If the ban had been lifted. A
principle, inherently right and dear to
| the hearts of thousands of fervent Meth
| odists, the workers in the church whose
zeal has and is doing so much to make
it effective Christian organization,
| would have been abandoned. In their
opinion it would have appeared to be a
| concession to the devil and all his games.
! and the barrier once raised would render
it difficult to make any distinction be-
tween that which is harmless in card
playing and that which is evil. No hard
and fast line could be established. The
Methodist church could not say whist
is harmless euchre is harmless in a
lesser degree, seven-up is just beyond
the pale and poker is an abomination.
That would be absurd. The card playing
problem from the standpoint of Metho-
dism requires either an absolute barrier
or no barrier and no barrier is not COM
patible with Methodism as it is written
in the laws Of the CHURCH
AS to dancing. which the general con-
ference has also decided shall remain
under the ban. the non Methodist who
loves to see young people enjoy them
selves and skip and play harmlessly to-
gether in the joy and fuIlness of the
spirit OF innocent youth, can only but
feel profound sympathy for the young
people of the Methodist church. Because
1T was the custom ofathe riff-raff fore
fathers Of the modern riff-raff to as
semble in taverns and indulge in dancing
and drinking to the scandal of our re-
spectacle Methodist forefathers, the said
respectable forefathers placed dancing
under the ban of the Methodist church,
and because certain loose Episcopalians
and Romanists would consort together
and indulge in dancing and other pas
| times. even on the Sabbath day, once in
a while, an element of schism entered
into the performance, of dances There
fore. because of these ancient -prejudices
the young people of the Methodist
church today may not dance. Dancing
in its modern forms does not commend
itself altogether to many who are not
within the Methodist fold. There are a
number of dances which seem to be de-
signed more to display eccentricities of
motion than for >healthfui exercise or the
physical expression Of a joyous temper
ament. The twisting. turning, careering
and posturtng practiced In many dances
leads to loss of mental restraint, bois-
Dances thus. like card games, have their
degrees Of merit and demerit. but these
degrees are equally difficult to denmark
The solemn stalkings and lackadaisical
poslngs of the nHnuet might be classed
as encouragements to vanity; the cir
clings, encirclings and turnfngs of the
waltz might be said to lead to giddiness.
and the careerings of the galop to loss
of dignity and to 1ooseness of thought
But such grading of dances would be as
impossible as it would be absurd If the
Methodist church distrusts dancing and
its influences. prohibition is the only ra-
tional or possible policy.
The amusement rule sustained by the
general conference also prohibits theater-
going. There is no discrimination as to
plays or players All are banned. Ir-
wing. Jefferson. the Kendals and Mans
field are included in the prohibitions, with
Olga Nethersole, Sam Jacks CreoIes and
Primrose and his minstrels There IS no
discrimination. Shakespeare's plays are
banned equally with the standard come
dies or the Frenchiest Of plays. But
the morality or otherwise of theater-
going has been discussed so many times
and at such great length that the ques-
ton is thoroughly understood by the
public generally
The prohibition Of these three forms Of
amusement is matter to be dealt with
by the conscience of the Methodist
church, and the voice of the general con-
ference has again declared that the pro-
hibition must be sustained. If the church
loses some of its young members by rea-
son of its position on these matters, 1t
can find solace In the fact that it has
remained steadfast to It's principles and
that those principles are not on the side
of unrighteousness.
District of Columbia commissioners