OCR Text |
Show H APOTLE McKAY'S DEPENS1 OF BISHOP TAYLOR. j j There is one thing about Apostle Mc"Kay that we like, and that H is ih,e h.pnest, fearless, uncomprpmi'sing sfqqd he takes for what he H thjhks is right, and if he errs it will always 'be with the best motives H and. intent, Hence we believe that Apostle McKay cannot forget H thjt he was the leader on the 'dry" side al the June election, and H when he saw such noted prohibitionists Samuel Browning and H J. 0. Nye running on a citv ticket ho qould not refrain from being HI displeased with the running mate these men had for mayor and H the apostle promptly got up a petition, for Ilcbcy Scowcroft for H mayor, and, having done that, he naturally concluded that a good citizenship .sermon at the Tabernacle was in order "While Apostle McKay did not mention the name of his candidate for mayor, we hope lie will forgive us for repeating that his people had a right to conclude that "he," Apostle McKay, thought at least that his own candidate for mayor, for whom he solicited names to the petition aud whose petiton he had' prepared, was the "good" man the apostle referred to in his sermon on the election of "good" men for office. Of course, knowing Apostle McKay as we do, we do not think he intentionally aimed to ijifluencp his flockt But it was not the intent of Apostle Mclypy's act that we complained of. AVc hold that from all Apostle McKay did, his people had a right to conclude con-clude that his "good"-man-for-officc sermon Mast Sunday was intended in-tended as a boost for "Brother Ileber Scowcrpft." Now we can forgive Apostle McKay for all he said and especially so when he is manly enough over his own signature to deny that he wanted to influence any of his people to vote for an' particular man, yet at thq same, time we think Apostle McKay should, and probalby will, abstain from such future political action, as a continuance of such action surely will result in trouble. But the case with Bishop Taylor is different. In fact the Bishop was just a little tpo raw; iu fact so raw that some of his own flock condemned him The refusal, or failure, pf the Bishop to explain his, action after being invited to do so, is a complete confession confes-sion of guilt. Of course, he can not deny his action. The Salt Lake Tribune itself has made a complete investigation of the matter mat-ter and thinks the offense much more serious than the Standard does. However, Apostle McKay and other leaders of the church must discipline Bishop Taylor rin order fo purge themselves of collusion in this matter. Either Bishop Taylor did wrong or he did right. Which? If he' did wrong, some disciplinary measure is necessary. If his action is satisfactory to the church silence would admit it. The statement of Apostle McKay that Bishop Taylor is responsible re-sponsible for his action and not the church, is not right. If the church is out of politics, it must discipline those church leaders who try to place the church in a compromising position. Let the church disown the action of 'Bishop Taylor, otherwise wc must understand his action stands approved. |