Arizona republican., 1908-03-31
Christianity and Alcohol E
IIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIiIIIII

(By Rev. H. R. Gamble. IL. D., in the
 Los Angeles EXaminer)
 At the present time a great deal of harsh language is used which seems to imply that the use of alcohol is forbidden 10 Christians. and that any one engaged in the business of brewing has forfeited all title to the Christian Lame. As matter of fact, language ot this sort is in itself anti Christian. It is tainted with the old heresy, that has appeared in so many forms, which regards material things as in them selves evil, whereas to the Christian religion the seat of evil lies not in material things, but in the perverted will of men.
 There is not d word in the Bible which treats wine or strong drink as in itself evil There are many denun- citations of drunkenness, but none of drink. There is nothing in the Chris tian religion which forbids @ moderate Use of alcohol, or which sets up tee totalism as in itself a higher ideal
 Surely nothing can be more clear on this question than the life and teaching of Christ himself. The contrast be tween John the Baptist and our Lord is very strongly marked. For John came neither eating nor drinking and they say: He hath a devil. The Son of Man came eating and drinking and they say: Behold man gluttonous and a wine bibber and a friend Of publicans and sinners" He increased the gayety of the wedding at Cana when he changed the water into wine.
 Or, once more. what could be more significant than that at the institution of Eucharist he should have chosen the common things of life. the bread that strengthened mans heart" the wine that maketh glad the heart of man. bread and wine-wine as well aS bread-to be made the memorial of His sacrifice. and the vehicle of His grace
 No serious person will maintain that when wine is thus mentioned some misunderstanding liquor is meant; and in the face of these things some of the language used by certain speakers on platform and in pulpits is, it must be confessed. rather surprising. Those who want d religion which fOrbids the use of wine can have it, but the re- Iigion is not Christianity, but Moham- mechanism.
 Whether the civilization produced by Mohammedanism is of a higher type than that developed under the influ- ence of Christianity, I must leave oth- CTS to decide.
 Tn laying down these principles which are sometimes forgotten or ig- nored. it is hardly necessary to say that
 
 the noble efforts of those who. in the hope of saving the victims of intem- perance. have themselves become total sbstainers. They have resolved for a certain purpose to resign a lawful in- dulgo nee. and in many cases they would be the last to use the sort of language that I have been deprecating In the same way We are bound to honor those who for the Kingdom of Heavens sake" have resolved to live the celibate life. But in neither case can they be regarded as setting stan dard for average humanity. nor can they who voluntarily abstain from al- cohol or marriage impose d similar rule of life upon others.
 Ii must then be granted that the Christian ieneiun leaves the question of the use or non-use of alcohol to tho judgment of each individual. But lher, k. of course another question behind this. Since it is admitted by all tha the abuse Of strong drink is a strong and crying evil in the country. would it not be advisable to aim at its aboli tion by law? Ought not our goal to b' the total prohibition of the sale of al intoxicating liquors?
 To this l would respectfully ventur, to reply that such a course. even i possible. would not be eXpedient. A if Is. the country is becoming slowl, but surely more sober. No one cal doubt this. Public opinion in all classe is against the Grunkard. and in thu upper and middle classes, as also in tn great portion Of the working classes those who drink. drink as a rule, no iI excess. but in moderation.
 Drunkenness. generally speaking. i