Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1859-10-06
Written for tho Yorkville Enquirer.
LETTER no oa-cosr1suEp.

for your benefit, the morality Of your drinking
spurious liquors habtuslly and daily; and I had
arrived to the cases Of some fessts in the celebra-
ton of which wine, &c., were used in drinking by
the guests To proceed:
Though there were many feasts of Gods ap-
pointment among the Israelites, Lev.129: 2, a,
A, yet, have found but one Of them all, cele-
brated with the drinking of any wine, and this was
on day, holy to the Lord. Chron. 80: 25.-
Neh. 8: 9-12;' lisa. 1920. Here, "all the con-
gregation Of Judah and Israel, together with their
strangers rejoiced." Now they were forbidden to
mourn, and commanded to seat the fat and drink
the sweet with mirth, and tcsthave song" Of
gadness of the heart. Here, to "drink the sweet"
is explained by the Greek Bible, to be 'sweet
wine," q wine incapable to produce into4ication.
But, Jesse you reply: "There was marriage
feast held at Cana in Gslliee, which was celebra-
ted with the drinking Of wine by the guests there
Of of whom, the Lord Jesus and his disciples
made part. And when they wanted more wine,
Jesus transmitted water into wine, to be drank on
this occasion. This drinking was moral, the a
gency of the Lord and his example madeit moral.
John, g."
Ans.-Very good: To celebrate marriage
feast among christians, with the drinking Of wine,
made of the juice of grapes; and this conducted,
always as was this feast, doubtless is moral Con-
ceded. -
But Jesse, you insist upon it, that the wine
used on this occasion was Sgood wine, e,"-ferment-
ed wine, and that spurious liquors in substance is
the same; therefore, to drink whisky &c., at mar
riage feasts is moral
Ans.-Not exactly so. There were various sorts
of wine made and used in Palestine, or Canaan,
among the Jews. Neh. s: 18. Now what sort
of wine was this drank on this occasion? There
;da1 of fho in;n of
grapes, John, 2: 10Y but whether new or old,
sweet or fermented, we know not. And when this
wine was falling short, Jesus produced more wine,
by changing water into wine, which was pronoun-
ced "good wine" Whether this did represent
new or old wine, sweet or fermented wine, we are
not informed. 1t is very certain, that distilled
spurious liquors had no place there.
You indeed assume, that the wine provided at
the first, was the product of fermentation, and Of
consequence, alcoholic in its composition but Of
this, you have no proof; you, however, hinge your
affirmation upon the words "well drunk" John,
9: 10. But sir, the words here, "well drunk" is
expressed by m ct hus thosi, from met huo,
10 drink aOine and although it signifies ''to drink
freely, and plentifnllG-though not to drunken,
ness it teaches not what took place on this occa-
sion but what generally is done at the manage
ment of feasts in general. We are not informed
of any of the effects of wine upon the gusts on
this occasiona And in the absence of all proof
upon the quality of this wine, it is but fair to
conclude that this first wine was "good," but was
new-sweet wine. and that of Jesus, represented
the same sort. Besides, we know that at feasts
of holy days among the Israeltes, wherein mirth
had its part sweet wine was allotted to be drank
by them. Neh. 8: 10. To affirm, therefore, that
the wine of this occasion, was "fermented wine,"
is to affirm what is incapable of proof; and to af-
firm that the guests on this occasion were "drunk,"
or were made merry with this wine, is to charge
the Lord with folly, and to slander him and his
disciples present.
In the absence of all proof upon the fermented
quality of this wine, for the sake of further illus
tratiou, concede it possible that the first wine
may have been fermented wine, for the following
reasons: /. Because, it is indirectly called "good
wine" The ruler of this feast said "every man"
at feasts in general-"at the beginning doth
set forth good wine" 2. Because, wine which
is old, was esteemed by men, better than the new.
Luke, 5: &c. 8. Because, none but old wine, and
not this always, is fermented wine. Upon this
hypothesis, do concede the possibility, that this
first wine may have been fermented wine; and
possibly, the wine of Jesus may have represent
ed the same sort Of wine because the ruler called
it "the good wine" as though it was esteemed bet
ter than the first. John, 2: 10, latter clause. y
In this view of this matter, the wine of this
sion was possibly fermented wine, capable to pro-
duce ntoxication; and thus may take rank with
distilled spirituous liquors.
Now Jesse, you do e1claim sSince the wine,
drank atthe marriage in Cana in Gallilee was fer
mented wine, and capable to produce intoxcation
in the drinker, it is in this on parity with whiskey,
SC. And since the drinking of this wine, on this
occasion by the guests is moral therefore, to
drink whiskey, &c.. in the celebration of marriage,
is also moral. And since the pledge of temper.
| ance men is, ''totaily to abstain from wine and
spurious liquors on all occasions therefore, 1t is
| immoral thus to make this pledge"
Ans.-I for one, am constrained to admit the
morality of drinking wine the juice Of grapes, in
marriage celebrations; and on some other occa-
sions or even whiskey in some quantity. For be-
sides the example of this marriage in Cana in
Gallilee, we have drinking wine at the feasts OF
bthe sons of Job, (chap /: 4. )-of Isaac and A
bimelech, (Gen. %: 3d. of Joseph and his
brethren, (Gen. 43: "a. and some others; all Of
which hold in general, is moral. In oil of which,
however, this drinking at these feasts, only can
be sanctifed with the heart attuned to praise the
Lord. Neh. 8: 10.
Again Although thus believe and teach Of
this morality in general, know, and do acknowl-
ege that self denial as christians, is the law OF
our discipleship; Matt. 16: "a and under Ger,
tain circumstances, what is Christians liberty
to do, becomes inexpedient and even unlawful for
him to do viz: 1t is lawful to Christian, who
lis affliction's son-at marriages, and some other
feasts to partake of wine, &C., in some measure.
Now, attendant circumstances, mey be such as to
demand of them ga total abstinence from wine,
&C." and thus abridge their christian liberty.
This do concede
Here Jesse, you do object and say, "All things
are lawful for me why is my liberty judged by
another mans conscience? If partake lawfully
of meat and drink with thankfulness to the Lord,
why am I evil spoken of? ?"
1as.-This is exactly the objection, and the rea
soning which some Roman and Corinthlan chris
tians made to St. Paul in like cases. Rom. IA
l Cor. 8: 10. And to these. st. Paul thus made
answer, "All things, however, are not expedient,
4 "whether you eat or drink, do all tt
the glory of God" "Let no man pu
O stumbling block, or occasion to fall in his broth
er's way" "Let every one of US please
his neighbor, for his good to edifcation."
"For even Christ, pleased not himself"
81 please all men in all things, not seeking mine
own profit" ''that they may be saved"
eff meat make my brother to offend, will no
eat flesh while the world standeth." II
is good neither to eat fesh nor to drink wine mol
any thing whereby my brother stumbleth, or i:
made weak" Rom. IA and 10: II; and l Cor
s.: 13 and 10.
To make the application of this teaching o
Paul to the case before US, dear Jesse, you have
only to consider the sum of drunkenness will
which we are surrounded, both in the world ant
in the Christian church; and the immense Wors
of reformation to be performed in the matter
before all men con know God, "as the water:
cover the seas" and the goodwill required in q!
before we can pray in good faith to God, "thJ
kingdom come, thy WI bf faaes fpaass e q sussa