Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1874-04-11
A JEWISH BABBI ON THE wOMEN's
WHISEEY WAR.

We copy from the Cincinnati Cor
| mercial, the following address deli
cred by Rabbi Isaac NJ. Wise, in TIL
city, upon the subject of the Women
War on Whiskey:
Is it morally wrong to take a gla:
of beer, wine or champagne at Dime
or at any other time or is it hypocris
for hypoerisy's sake that persons usin
such beverage do it secretly as long q
they can hide the fact? Let us Sc
first what might be called moral
wrong.
Morally wrong is that which the in
telligence by common consent calls so
or, as our religious friends maintain
which the Bible characterizes as such
All Nations of antiquity used win
or strong drink, as they called it il
Hebrew, as beverage, and as ingre
dients of the sacrifices. Among moderl
Nations the Mohammedans only max,
an exception. They drink no win,
and eat no pork. We have no stats
ties to prove that this has made then
any better, purer or wiser than Chris
tians or Jews. They use other stimu
lants and in another form, some o
which are of an unchaste and destruc.
tive nature, such as opium and poIyga-
my. There is no difference in taking
precisely the same.
Outside of the Islamites, however
the use of wine or strong drink as a
beverage is common among all classes
of society, excepting, ofcourse, honest
and upright temperance people IN our
country and in England, who are rath-
er scarce, as were the Nszarites and
Rachabites among the ancient He
brews. III
Well then, intelligence by common
consent does not declare the use of
such beverages as being immoral ;
hence it is as moral as eating choice
food. sleeping on costly couehes, prom
enading, or seeking amusement and
pleasure In any legitimate form.
What does the Bible say on the sub
ject? Moses certainly had no idea of
prohibiting use of wine or strong drink;
for he says to the priest (Levit. K, 8
WINE and strong drink thou shalt not
drink, thou and, thy sons with thee,
when ye come into the tabernacle of
the congregation" &C., or wherever
acting in an official capacity; but out
side thereof no such prohibition ex-
lists in the laws of Moses, for either
priest or people; and Moses was very
strict in dietary laws. Whatever was
sacrificed upon the altar, like salt,
-four, oil, pigeons, doves, turtle doves,
sheep, goats and cattle was also
intended as most desirable articles
for common consumption. With the
exception of the feast of booths, wine
was one of the ingredients of the sacri-
fees, and included also in the tithes
given to the priest. So it was con-
sidered one of the necessaries OF life.
The law concerning the Nazarite is an
exception for the sake of gloomy asE
cetics, in which the Orient abounded.
Whatever Moses did not prohibit,
the Prophets did not. Isaiah, up
braiding the weakness of his people,
says, THY wine is adulterated with
water and the PsalmIst sings, And
wine gladdens the heart of man"
Rachabites are praised by Jeremiah
for their obedience to their fathers
teachings, without any recommends
ton whatever of their custom. The
ancient Hebrews called the public
banquet mishteh, "a drinking occa-
sion." They opened and closed every
meal on Sabbath or holiday with wine,
closed the Sabbath with wine, and
solemnized marriages again with wine,
as is the case to this day among the
Jews, who must have wine
to perform their religious duties we'll
Moses and the Talmud are not opposed
to the use of wine or strong drink.
The Jew might consider itsuperfuous
to the more orthodox than Moses, the
prophets or the rabbis of old.
| did not succeed in, finding in the
New Testament that anything going
into the mouth is sinful. Jesus and
his disciples did drink wine, that is
certain, also at the Last Supper; so
did the primitive Christians, as Paul
says, and so does the Church to date.
There is not passage in the New Tes-
lament which prohibits the use of wine
or strong drink as beverage, and it is
difficult for Christians of the nine
teenth century to be more orthodox
than Jesus and his apostles. There
fore it must be admitted that intelli-
gence by common consentand the Bible |
of both Jews and Christians do not
consider it moral wrong; hence it is
not, to use wine or strong drink as a
beverage. This admitted, it follows
that you have no right to tell this or
that man, Il may, but you shall not
take glass of wine it is moral for
me, but immoral for you" unless you
argue from the principle of economy,
which makes no moral wrong of the |
thing itself.
Let us examine for a moment into !
the argument of economy. tits main
tanned that the products of nature and |
industry are for the sustenanee and |
comfort ofall. If one uses and wastes
so much more than his just share as
person, another must be deprived of |
his. e., provided there is no more
than exactly enough for all. There
fore, to waste God gifts, they say, isin-
direct theft. The materials changed !
into fomented beverages are wasted,
turned to useless purposes.
1t is not established in my mind |
that this proposition will be indorsed |
by modern practicians of medicine, |
who stimulate patients to quicken the /
functions of the organism. 1t is not !
decided in physiology and dieteties |
that the alcoholic Ingredients in mans 5 !
food are superfuous. Nor is it salts
factorily established that men, who !
must perform a certain amount of la
Dor in a given time under exhaustive
can do without stimu-
lants in justice to their health and |
vigor. But these being strictly scien-
ti6c questions, can not discuss them !
here. We know that many a gem Of |
poetry and song owes its existence to a !
smile of beauty, or an affectionate |
glance from bright eyes. We also !
know that many others and no less
charming beauties of poetry or music |
owe their existence to cup of old |
wine, We know, furthermore, that /
talent and genius sleep on the calm
mirror of Imagination; they rise and |
fash forth their innate fire by the un-
dulations of the phantasy, as the ocean
shows its silyery hue by high towering
waves. Genius and happiness delight |
In unadulterated imagination. But this /
is a psychological question to which | |
can not do justice here. We know
that nine-tenths of all human beings
use stimulants in this or that form,
hence, if common usage proves any
thing, it can not be called superhuous |
or waste of material. Still we will |
not insist unon this disnuted noint I