On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    g^g The Saturday A'natyst and Leader. [O...

  • 

    * II sooinn, liv tlio wiiy. 11 ml. fop-l...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    The Wink Question: ^ The Teetotill/L-Eus...

    ' Scholars must : be perfectly aware , that both anterior and subsequent to the Christian era , various popular bodies of abstainers existed . Voltaire long since noticed the fact in his "Spirit of the Nations . " Neander , in his ' . ' € hurch History , " observes . - that " there were different kinds of abstinent sects " ( ii . p . 129 ) . Professor Jowett , in his recent comment on the Epistles of St . Paul , lavs great stress upon the 2 reva ^ ence ? * " abstinence " in the centuries immediately preceding the Christian era . " He admits that the same tradition which handed us the Gospels , " delighted to

    attribute a similar abstinence to James , the brother of our Lord ; and to Matthew and Peter . " The Ne \ y Testament shows that Timotheus , the Bishop of Corinth , was one of the Eneratites—n water drinker . Jowett adds : —" ¦ The apostolic canons admit an ascetic abstinence , but denounce those who abstain from , any sense of the impurity of matter- Jewish , as well as Alexandrian arid Oriental influences , combined to maintain the practice in the first centuries . Long after it had ceased to be a Jewish scruple , it remained as a counsel of perfection " ( ii . p . 323 ) . time back

    The English Dean of Carlisle , Dr . Close , having some published an " Apology for Abstinence , " assigning- the reasons why heihad taken the pledge , the Irish Dean , Mr . Woodward , has taken the field in defence of the moderate bottle . We have carefully considered the eight pages of plausible reasoning which the reverend Dean of Down has issued against the Teetotalers ; and , looking at them as simple specimens of criticism and logic , we are bound to confess that we cannot conscientiously drink port and sherry upon the strength of them . Let us at least be honest ; and if we will drink , let us not drink on fallacious pretences .

    The first page of the eight begins with the proposition that Christ's example was a perfect model for our own , and ends with promising to decide , by the " inexorable logic of a demonstration , " whether the example of Jesus inculcates , or is directly opposed to , the principle of abstinence ! Now , this loose statement might have passed well enough , without exciting surprise , from the lips of Mr , Spurgeon or Dr . Cnmtning—but from , the editor of Professor Butler ' s works , we hardly could expect it . Surely , the learned Dean will not affirm that Christ ' s " example" of not marrying is " opposed" either to the principle , or to the practice , of marriage ? To start with , then , we have here a false and illogical collation of terms . Christ's practice can be no example to us in many things .

    The Dean ' s Master flogged the traders but of the Temple with a whip of small cords , but is that , therefore , any part of the discipline of the Irish Church ? Reason , founding itself upon circumstances which are ever varying , can alone cletei'inine in what cpse ^ Christ's example should be our model . Mr . Jowett has wisely said of several instances of precept and example—" these are sufficient to teach us how moderate we should be in reasoning from particular precepts , even where they agree with our preconceived opinions . The truth seems to be , that the Scripture lays down no rule appliccable to individual cases , or separable from the circumstances under tohic / i it is given , " p . 314 . The staple to which the Dean has fastened his chain is loose- let xis now test its successive

    links . The second page alleges that our Lord ' s statement of the difference between John and Himself turns on this precise point . " John was strictly— ' ( if I must use that barbarous Americanism )—a Teetotaler . " * Some of the books before us throw great doubt upon this allegation : nay , Dr . Lees , in his volume , repudiates the comparison entirely . It has already been shown that there were different kinds of abstainers in ancient times—some with good , some with partly good and par tly bad , reasons ; some enlightened and moderate , others extreme abstainers . For anything * in the premises , therefore , Christ mi ght have been one sort of abstainer , John another . Tndeed , it is absolutely certain that the contrast had its limits practically ; and even if wo did not , by the very form of the words , come to such a

    conclusion , wo should still be compelled to concede , that & general contrast does not warrant an umversal inference of opposition . The record can never be abused to the justification , ofsuoh a sequence as this , '" that Christ used all sorts of bread and drink , from which John abstained" . The Teetotaler may logically retort upon the Dean , that since John came , eating 1 no bread at all , drinking- no wine at all , while they take ( if hot all sorts of bread and wine ) , at least sonio sorts—ho was both more and loss than a , Teetotaler ; while Christ , who took tho ordhwy good bread , and tho ordinary good wine , wau precisely like themselves . Tho Dean appears to have fallen into tho same fallacy as St . Augustine , whp reproached tho Teetotalers in tho ancient Church with dearying wine , while they sucked tho juico of grapes . " Quno tanta porvorsio ost , vinum putaro Folprincipis tenobrarum , ot xivis comedondis nonpavcoro , "

    ( Do Morih . ManicJtcBor , lib . ii . s . 44 ) . Nevertheless , tho Teetotalers wore right in their distinction , as we know in thin ago of scientific analysis—and tho Saint was wrong boyond all doubt . Christ , it may bo alleged , like the modern Teetotalers , discriminated the wine-ofrtho-grapo from the wine which is a mocker—sanctioned tho via media between tho dualistie-dogma and tho soiontifio truthdistinguished botwoon tho " refreshing-juice" and " the trioksyspirit of alcoho ] . Wo should like to ' boo how the Dean could moot that position . Tho third pago is devoted to tho making of wltto out of Wutov at tho mni'ruig'o i ' oast . Wo porooivo a rospootablo Kensington ( shomint pQi-potually advertising , undov tho gMiarantee of tho temperance hi & duvd , a Sacramental Wine , at 86 s . nor dozen ., for tho use of oimrohofl , instead of poisoned Port or adulterated lent ,

    Now , we imagine , that a miraculous power of transmuting water into such wine would not be at all objected to by Mr . F . Wright , and this may lead the Dean to consider that the pinch of the argument is not about wine in the abstract , but about the alcoholic natureof the wine , actually made at Caua . The question of quantity must give way to the prior one of quality . Here Augustine ^ Iveaiider , and l ) ean Trench , are all against Dean Woodward . The fourth page is devoted to the iSacramontal elements of bread and wine ; concerning which , as it appears to us , the teetotalers are somewhat too scrupulous . Why , in that symbolic and commeinorative institution , should we stop to consider tho quality o £ the material elements ? So far from despising thu

    command regarding : " the fruit of the vine , " the abstainers havo taken pains to establish a special manufactory of pure , unfermented wine , in this respect imitating some sections of tho Jewish community . The Dean seems to know nothing of all this ; and hence his chain of " inexorable logic" breaks asunder at every link . Let us , however , be just in our criticism . If wo think the abstainer somewhat superstitious in his scrupulosity , unless he acts on moral and social grounds , we deem it equally inconsistent with true and high views of the ordinance , to stickle for Port or Tent , and object to pure grape wine ; and it rises to a point of absurdity when we perceive men . insisting on fermented wine because He is supposed to have drank it , while they despise the Mwfermented bread whichthey know he consumed .

    The fifth page is devoted to the apostolic teaching , and is preceded by the startling assertion that "it is obvious drunkenness was just as prevalent then as now , if not inore so . " We do not pretend to be so versed in scripture as the reverend Dean , whose business it is to peruse and expound it , but , certainly this statement sounds very novel , and seems very apocryphal . The gospels , so far as we recollect , rarely refer to this vice . Ardent spirits were then unknown . Christ never appears to have rebuked

    a drunkard . At the day of Pentecost , an absurd charge implying that Peter and his brethren were excited with drink , is at once silenced by pointing to the fact that it was only the forenoon . Paul , years after , declares that he and the Christians are sons of the day , and that they who are drunken , are drunkeii in thenif / hf . That the people there and ! then were as drunken as tlic people here and now , when every thirtieth habitation is cither beer-house , wine-vault , or dram-shop , is a statement demanding stronger proof than the learned Dean has yet advanced . is served bthe citation

    We do not comprehend what purpose y of such texts as tho following : "'Be not drunk with wine , wherein is excess . " ( Eph . v . 18 . ) " Run not with them to the same excess of riot . " ( 2 Pot . iv . ) Is it that " excess" only being here contlumaed , something short of excess is right ? But this is not according to the usage of language , for . even teetotalers will speak against drunkenness , without the slightest idea of sanctioning the use short of inebriety . Peter , in the above text , could not mean to imply that a little riot avus good . If the Apostles , then , condemn drunkenness in ever so inauy texts , it does not follow that they do not , in other places , also condemn the drink , liko the Severians of old , " because it is the rtr > nte of drunkeness . " . " Inexorable logic" cannot bo mado out of negations : yet another negative argument of the Dean ' s is tho following : " Tho

    C 3 OIL b"US M 3 U . U'Ull ) \ J \ tllU kJIJUlu io uvi / iiuQumwuvy j » ' «« - *"'"/' - ' " ( Gal . v . 23 . ) What would tho Dean think if we wei ' u to argue that Virtue , not '' Chastity , " was the fruit of tho Spirit contrasted with Vice / Would he not reply that the larger term included , not oxcluded , the smaller ? Wo turn to our ( Irook lexicon and find that " continence" and " abstinence " nro , at least , two ot the senses or applications of tho word iu tho Now Tostament . bo Paul evidently meant that Folix should " abstain" totally irom his connexion with one of his two wives ; and abstinonoo irom wine was the the rogimen of those who ran in tho Olympio games , to whioh Paul alludes in tho second text . " Contain aot' is tho senso of a third passage . But what uttorly destroys tho inference abstainer

    of the Dean is tho foot alvoady stated , that tho anpiont * wero called JZnomtites , from tho very word for " tomporanoo usod by St . Paul . To bo " tomporHto , '' tliproforo , so far from oxolviding , very ofton included , afafiiwiee . Mr , Woodwavd is snroly doparting widely from tho teaching oi the Churoh , when , ho quotes the text , " fat / kin // unto Jesus , tho axithor and flnishor of our Faith , " xih if it ooulcl possibly motin that we wore not to attend to deeds and duties , as tho oonditiuns and disoiplino of a ; holy life . Paul ' s aclvioo commends itself to uh as better than the Dean ' s . "Put yo on tho Lord Josum C nrwr , Mi & mufo not ' provision for tho Jlosh ( ois opithymhuO which tcnti * to lust . 77 This appears but tho Apostolio ooho of tho provormui warning of tho older book , " Look not upon tho wino , lost tlnno /> Tr / ia lrtrtlr in ^ rk Ti « fi < nnrrA wnmAn ''

    Tho boldest of the . Dean ' s animations against tho aba tumors is this!— "In the opiet . los whore drunkonnosH in tnentionod , nut in one sinqlo instanoo is total abstinence rooomuaondocl , or HuggoHtoa , as its remedy . " If this bo ho , the Toototnlors aro sovipturallv . weak , And tho Doan is inyinoiblo ; for wo agrea with him that tno " oxpodienoy " avgiimont is shaky . AVo aro not , howovor , bh suro that the Doaa's assertion i « qaito oorroot . Though wo nnvo forgotten muoh of our oollogo lore , wo hnvo still sorao l'ootH oi n loft , and oan tliumb our Now Xestauiont , and spoil out our ijutaroh or Josoplius at a pinoh . In spilo of our revownno !<> r tim J ^ oau , doubts will ariso that nil is not right , If tho apostlos and ovangelists — Paul , . Peter , and Matthew , to wit — yroro 1 oototalor » , wo » houlcl oxpoot to iind Homo two oi" the tlootrmu m

    G^G The Saturday A'Natyst And Leader. [O...

    g ^ g The Saturday A'natyst and Leader . [ Oct . 6 , I 860

    * Ii Sooinn, Liv Tlio Wiiy. 11 Ml. Fop-L...

    * II sooinn , liv tlio wiiy . 11 ml . fop-lutnl Ih nn old Unftllnli nijil IrUh word , usod thirty yonrs i \« o , both ' liy JMr . JJo ¦ Quluooy and Mr , " imlin i ni ) d , In soot ) i , wo dp not boo tbnt ft U ono whit inoro ImrlmrQiiD , or louu oii |) ltoiiloiiH , tluui tlio glnusioal doNlgunitlou o ( JS \ ephnltti \ t ( iio- ( lijlnltoris ) ndoptod by tlio Atiuliilnlng HtudoiUa of ISillnluirixli , It In I'orliilnly very i \ mil oh on n lo tho Untln n ' nu'iitm , " gnwliiod . "

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Oct. 6, 1860, page 6, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_06101860/page/6/