Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1881-08-31


feet Of aicoLoi upo" the body, may be round in D
} Richardson's Temperance Lesson Cooks"
DANIEL |: 5. " But Daniel pprpQsed in his he ar
I kings meat nor with the wine which he drank"
DANIEL 5:l. Beshszzar. the king, made grea
feast to thousand Of his lords aud drank wine belor
, he thousand"
These selections fScripture contrast tn,
example of two individuals. The first wa.
/ young man, IA captive in strange land
Unknown and almost friendless he vet hac
tavOraby impressed by his frank and hon
est countcnance the master of the king,
household, among others he was chosen to
become n member of the kings household
10 learn the Chaldean language. and the
laws and manners and customs of the
kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar And by
commandment of the king there was given
to these youn men daily rations of meat
md OF wine, of such as was provided for
he table of the king himself. Truly most
would say that Il very fortunate thing
had happened to them; but Daniel soon
had opportunity to learn the customs of
his captors. He was in an idolatrous
court; wine drinking and reveling and the
nfering of sacrifice unto idols prevailed.
|
the pleasure-seeking throng, and thus avoid
bsing peculiar, land avoid giving offeuse; !"
hut to do this he must lay aside his prin
ciples.
Daniel had evidently been well instruct
ed in his youth, He worshipped the God
of Heaven and had no respect for idols,
and though many Jews were given to
drinking intoxicating liquor Daniel evi.
IDENTITY was total abstaner. Perhaps
total abstinence ideas had been enlisted
into his mind in his home, or he had adopt
ed them rs he came to understand the evil
effects of wine drinking. As Daniel was
brought captive into the court OF Nebu
chadnezznr at Babylon and provided with
meat and wine from the kings table, an
opportunity to test the strength of his
principles presented itself Shall he risk
offending the king by standing by his
principles, or shall he gain the favor of the
king and the good will of all his household
by iorsakng his principles, and by not
making himself peculiarP Whether Daniel
was tempted here we cannot tell; but the
strength of his character is shown by the
fact that he determined in himself that he
| would not defile himself with the kings
meat ana wine. A more fattering oppor-
runity for making ones principles subser-
Went to the desire for popularity never
presented itself to any human being, and
n nCbler desire was never made Than when
Daniel determined that he would not detie
himself with the kings meat and wine
whatever the consequences might be.
Contrast this noble devotion to principle
with the example of Belshazzar brought to
,,,.,
and powerful monarch, but so dead to all
sense of duty, So careless of his influence,
and of the interests of his kingdom that
when he made feast to thousand of his
lords he himself led in the revelry of the
occasion and drank wine before the thou
sand. Contrast moment these examples.
Beshazzar, with the honor and safety of
kingdom at stake, his country invaded by
Il foreign foe, his capital already threaten.
ed, gives himself up 10 revelry, and in
famed by wine INDUCES in debauchery
with his lords and his concubines. On the
other hand, Daniel with nothing at stake,
except his private character; with appar-
emily nothing to lose and everything to
gain by accommodating himself to the
customs of Nebuchadnezzar' court, yet
with a purpose which nothing can shake,
determines that he will not detiIe himself
with the kings meat and wine. Come
what may he will stand by what he knows
to be right.
You who are acquainted with the snbse-
quent history of these men need not be
told that Daniel was the nObler of the two
and that his promotion step by step, until
he became under Nebuchadnezzar, ruler
over the whole province of Baby ylon-and
then in the Medo Persian EN- pire, which
under Darius succeeded the Baby ylonian-.
the first Of three presidents who were set
over the conquered kingdom, was due to
his unwavering fidelity to his principles.
Daniel was a total abstainer from whatever
would deflc his conscience, lessen his self
respect or injure his body. He understood
total abstinence to be the true and safe
ground. He was what DR.. Crosby and
some lesser lights would term bigot and
a fanatic; Il man who prescribed none
who would not drink it moderately even !;
one of those men that "do more hurt thnn
good in the emperance cause" But let
us inquire was not Daniel after all right in
determining that he would totally abst in
from whatever would inure his body,
lessen his self-respect or defile his cons
cience? Ger ainly the results in his case
were good. and his life is held up as one
of the noblest examples of antiquity.
We are most interested to day in Daniels
position on the wine question. We care
less about the meat. To offer meat to
| idols is not a custom of the civilized world
to-day. But the use of wine beer cider
and other intoxicating liquors is fearful to
contemplate, and we are called upon to
take position somewhere. There is no
excuse for trying to occupy neutral ground.
Both parties despise the man who, to use
Il homely phrase, is ION the fence"
The question to-day seems to be: Shall
we become total abstainers, giving up all
| light drinks such as beer wine, cider, ETC.,
and get along without any brandy in our
mince pies? or shall we denounce all who
are thus radical as old foges, as bigots
and fanatics, and while virtuously de.
nouncing drunkenness, demand moderate
and reasonable (p) use of the lighter bever-
ages. Both these positions are defended
to day by those who claim to be friends of
temperance. DR.. Crosby has fought hard
to shut up the low groggeries of New
York city Yet he comes to the lecture
platform of fremont temple, Boston, to
pronounce total abstinence fanatcism, and
its advocates fanatics, and boldly to advo-
cate the moderate use of the lighter bever-
ages as IL temperance measure Wendell
Phillips and scores of the clergy through
out the country have dissented and shown
up the evil of DR.. Crosbys position, and
the war for total abstinence and prohibition
wages more hotly than ever.
What position shall we take ? True
temperance is moderation in the use of
whatever is good and beneficial to man.
True temperance is also total abstinence
from all that is injurious to man. We are
led then TO inquire into the effects of alco-
holic liquors, and we are bound to inquire
into their physiological, mental and moral
effect, or their effect upon the physical,
mental and moral man. 1t is no longer n
debatable question that the immoderate
use OF these liquors is injurious. All admit
that. No one justies drunkenness; but
many justify the moderate use of the
lighter verages-cider, wine, beer, etc +,
and although brandy is one of the very
strongest of the intoxicating beverages,
yielding often over fifty per cent of pure
alcohol, yet many Christian women think
a