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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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.

    Untitled Article

    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 " Church History , " observes . that " there -were different hinds of abstinent sects " _ ( ii . p . 129 ) . Professor Jowett , in his recent comment ! on the Epistles of St . Paul , lays # reat stress upon the prevalence of 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 New Testament shows that Timotheus , the Bishop of Corinth , was one of the Encratites—a 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 and 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 "(»• P- 323 ) ¦ . .. havi time back

    The English Dean of Carlisle , Dr . Close , ng- some published an " Apology for Abstinence , " assigning the reasons why heihad taken the pledg e e , the Irish Dean , Mr . Woodvyard * 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 arid sherry upon the strength of them * Let us at least be honest ; and if we will drink , let us not drink on fallacious pretences . that

    The first page of tlie eight begins with the proposition 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 enoug-h , without exciting- surprise , from the lips of Mr . Spurgeon or Dr . ' Cunnning "—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 hi many things .

    The Dean ' s Master flogged the traders out of the Temple with a whip of small cords , but is that , therefore , any part of the discipline of the Irish Church ? Heasou , founding itself upon circumstances which are ever varying-, can alone determine in what cases 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 izo rule appliccable to individual casds , or separable from the circumstances under tohich it is given" p . 314 . The staple to which the Dean has fastened his chain is loose : let us 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 Teetotale > : " *' Some of the books before us throw groat doubt upon this allegation : nay , Dr . Lees , in his volume , repudiates the comparison entirely . It 1 ms already been shown that there , were different kinds' of abstainers in ancient times—some with good , some with partly g'ood and par tly bad , reasons ; some enlightened and moderate , others extreme abstainers . For anything" in the premises , therefore , Christ might have been one sort of abstainer , John another . Indeed , it is absolutely certain that the contrast had its limits practically ; and even if we did not , by the very form of the words , come to such a

    conclusion , wo should still be compelled to concede , that a general contrast does not warrant an zmivefscd inference of opposition . The record can never be abused to thojustification of such a sequence as this , " that Christ used all sorts of bread and drink , from which John abstained . " The Teetotaler niay logically retort upon tho Dean , that since John came , Gating- no bread at all , drinking no wine at all , while they take ( if not all sorts of bread and wine ) , at least some sorts—he was both more and loss than a Teetotaler ; while Christ , who took the ordinary good broad , and tho ^ ordinary good wine , was precisely like themselves . The Doan appears to have fallen into the same fallacy as St . Axigustino , who reproached tho Teetotalers in the ancient Church with decrying wino , while they sucked the juico of grapes . " Qua ) tanta pervorsio est , vinum putare Fel prineipis tenobmrurn , ot uviw comodondis non paraoro , " ( Do Morib . Manichcaov . lib . ii . s . 41 ) . Nevertheless , the Teetotaler

    wore right in their distinction , as wo know in this ag * o of scientific umilysia—and tho Saint was wrong boyond all doubt . Christ , it may ho alleged , like tho modern Teetotalers , clLsoriininated tho wino-of-tho-grape from tho wino which is a mockor—sanctioned tho via media botwoon tho dualistic-dogma and tho scientific truthdistinguished botwoou tho " refreshing-juice" and " tho trioksyspirit of alcohol . Wo should like to soo how the Dean could moot that position . The- third- page is dovo'tod to tho making of wino out of water at tho marriage foast . ' Wo porooivo a rospootablo Konaingtou ohomint' perpetually advertising 1 , undur tho guarantee of tho tomporauoo loaders , u Sacramental Wine , at 86 a . nor dozen , for tho use of ohurohua , instead of poisoned Port or adulterated Tent .

    Now , we imagine , that a miraculous power of transmuting water into such wino would not be at all objected to by Mr , F . Wright , and this may lead the Doan to , consider that tho pinch of the argument is not about wine in the abstract , but about the alcoholic nat ' tire of the wine actually made at ( -ana . The question of quantity must give way to the prior one of quality . Here Augustine , Neander , and Dean Trench , are all against Dean Woodward . . The fourth page is dovoted to the Bacramontal elements of bread and wine ; concerning- which , as it appears to us , the teetotalers are somewhat too scrupulous . Why , in that symbolic and comtnernorative institution , should we stop to consider the quality of the material elements ? So far from despising the

    command regarding " tho fruit of the vine , " the abstainers have 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 wu 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 g-rape wine ; and it rises to a point of absurdity when Ave perceive men insisting on fermented wine because He is supposed to have drank it , while they despise the «« fermented bread which they know ho 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 more 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 states ment sounds very novel , and seems very apocryphal . The gospels , so far as we reeolleot , 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 arc drunken , are drunken in . the nifib . f . That the people there and then were as drunken as the people beerItousr

    hero and now , when every thirtieth habitation is cither - , ¦ w ine-vaidt , or dram-shop , is a statement demanding- stronger proof than tKe learned Dean has yet advanced . We do not comprehend what purpose is served by the citation of such texts as the following : "Be not drtink with wino , wherein is e . rw . v . v . " ( Ep . h . v . 18 . ) " Han not with them to the same excess of riot . " ( 2 Pet . iv . ) Is it that il excess" only being here , condemned , 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 tho use short of inebriety . Peter , in the abovo text , could not mean to imply that a little riot was good . If tho Apostles , then , condemn drunkenness in ever so many texts , it dous not follow that they do not , in other places , also coudemn the drink , like the Severians of old , " because it is tho cause of

    drurikeness . ' . , " Inexorable logic" cannot bo inadu out of negations : yet another negative argument of the Dean ' s is tliu following : " Xhi 1 contrasted fruit of the Spi rit is not Abstinence , but Temperance . " ( Gal . v . 23 . ) What would the Dean think if we were to argue that Virtue , not "Chastity , " was tho fruit of the Spirit contrasted with Vice / Would ho not reply that the larger term included , not excluded , the smaller ? Wo turn to our ( Jrcok lexicon and find that " continence" and " abstinonce" arc , at least , two of tho senses or applications of tho word in the Now Testament . Ho Paul evidently meant that Felix should " abstain" totally from his connexion with one of his two wives ; and abstinence from wine was the the roffimen of thoso who ran in the Olympic games , i

    to whioh Paul alludes in tho soooud text . ( Contain not" is tho sonso of a third passage . But what utterly destroys the inference of the Doan is tho faot already stated , that tho ancient abstainer * wero called JEncraiitcs , from tho vory word for " toniporaneo " used by St . Paul . To bo " tomperato , ' thoro . foro , so far from excluding , voiy often included , abstinence , Mr . Woodward is surely departing widely from tho toaohmg ol the Churoh , when ho quotes tho text , " looking unto Jesus , tho author and finishor of our Faith , as if it oould possibly mean that wo wore not to attontf . to deads and duties , as tho conditions and disoiplino of a holy lifo . Paul ' s advioo oommonds itsolf to us as bettor than tho Dean ' s . " Put yo on tho Lord Josus Clmttt , and make vot'provision j \> r the Jlesh ( ois opithymiiw ) which tends to lust . This anuoars but tho Apostolio ooho of the' provorbuil 11

    warning of tlio oldor book , " Look not upon tho wiuo , lest tniu oyos look upon Btrango women . " . , Tho boldoBt of the Doan ' s affirmations against tho abstainors in this : — "In tlxo opistlos whoro drunkonuosH in mentionod , not hi quo sinqlo instance is total abstinenoo roooinmondod , or suggostod , as its remedy . " If this le bo , tho Toototalors aro Boripturally weak , audtho Doan is iuviaoiblo ; for wo agroo with him that tho " oxpodioupy '' argument in shaky . VVu aro not , lipwuvor , « i > auro that tho Dean ' s assertion is quite eorrout . Though wo hnvo forgottoij , nauoli of our oollogo loro , wo huvo still sonio roots ai il loft , and can thumb our Now Testament , and spell out our 1 lutaroh or iToHopliuH at a pinoh . Tn spito of our rovoronoo lor tno Dean , doubtu will arise that all is not right . If tho apostles and , evangelists — Paul , Petor , and Mattliow , to wit — wore leototalers , wo hIiouUI oxiioot to find « omo Imvv of tho dogtnnu iu

    Untitled Article

    * Icbo « m > h , Iiy tlio wny , that . TiiC'tofal In fin ulit ICiikIIhIi mid Irl «» I ) word , uhoiI thirty yonrH mo , l > otli by Mr . i >» ( iuliwvy ftml Mr . Hiuilm ; untl , iu nootlj , wo do not boo tbm It Id ono wlilt moro imrliiirpin , or loss ouphQiiloiiMb tluui tlio ol « 8 « l ?« rtoslgniUion © f A o « i > halltcf (( jo-drlnkors ) iidoiitort i > y tlio nbetnlniiiB atuiontq of Ucllnljiiryli . U \» I'uvtnliily vtr . v » imln }{ ijiiH l- > Ilio Lnlln ( On << tmii , 'pnnlncO .

    Untitled Article

    g 46 The Saturday Analyst and Leader . [ Oct . 6 , 1860

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Oct. 6, 1860, page 846, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2368/page/6/