The Ocala evening star., 1922-12-26
WHY NOT THE PREACHERS L?

Z. In the last three days, three of our
friends have inquired of US, in a dis
paraging way, why we asked the opin-
ion of the preachers of the town on
the return of Arbuckle to the shadow
stage, and why we did not ask the
opinion of other people. Some few
other gentlemen have hinted to us
that we were second cousin to a mule
and we hear of others who have more
than limited it and other things. Of
the inquirers, one was lawyer, one a
merchant and one a working man,
who by virtue of having left the print
of his hobnails in various parts of
France, has, in our opinion, right to
take part in any public discussion.
These gentlemen being widely apart
in age, occupation and temperament,
it has occurred to us that they are
representative, and many others of
our readers may be from Missouri on
this question.
We will take the world into our
confidence and put it wise to some of
the workings of our antiquated mind.
In the first place, we did not ask the
preachers alone for their opinion, nor
did we ask them first. We observed
in the dispatches of some papers that
are larger than this modest Tin size)
rag that number of woman's clubs
were combating letting down the bars
to fatty and at once inquired thru our
phone of the president of the Ocala
Woman's Club if we could obtain an
expression of opinion from that body
on the subject. She said she thought
we could, at the same time giving her
own opinion against Arbuckle. Sever
al other members of that organization
have individually told US that they
regarded Arbuckle pictures as a con-
tamination. A few minutes after we
phoned to the president of the Wom-
ans Club, we asked our society re-
porter to make a similar request of
the Business and Professional Wom-
ans Club. 1t was not until after this,
by several hours that we asked for
the opinion of the preachers. Now,
the Woman's Club and the B. & P. W.
Club have not held meetings since our
request was made, so they have not
been able to express an opinion. The
preachers gave their opinion individu-
ally and could do so in a short time
All their letters came in early Satur-
day, and it was practicable to print
them that day. They were all inter.
esting-the opposition to them BY
some of our readers shows that, anC
we venture to say that the opposition
would make mighty poor out at com
batting their arguments.
Now, the question is, why not asl
a the preachers? Some say that preach
ers should eonfne themselves to ex
planning and insisting upon principle
and never applying principle to indi
viduals. That would suit the immora
to a nicely. Denounce sin on tn
broad principle alone, and the averag
man will either think he is not com
hitting that sin in a sinful way, o
that he has a good excuse. The me
who have shaken the world and force
it forward have been men who have
when necessary, said who was VIII
and what was what. John the Baptis
did not stand up in the synagogu
ard read the ten commandments
told Herod and Herodias what the
were, and his name has been powe
to conjure with thru the centuries.
A preacher or a priest has no NOR
personal influence with the editor Q
this, paper than any other man. I
public affairs we Judge them by wha
they do or say. It is idle for any per
son to say that preacher does no
have influence If he has been wit
his church for any length of time, an
is acceptable to his congregation,
is only reasonable to infer that he ha
more influence than any one else i
the church We win not stop to argu