Personal Experience of a Physician

by John Ellis

CANON WILBERFORCE ON SACRAMENTAL WINES.

Canon Wilberforce is reported by the London Temperance Record as saying at a recent meeting in England: "He believed if people desired to go back literally and absolutely to the days of the institution of the Sacrament, it would be a most difficult thing, if not impossible, to prove that the particular cup which their Master took in His hand in that solemn crisis of His life when He instituted the Holy Eucharist was fermented at all. There was abundant testimony to prove it was not. Some went back to primitive authorities. He should like to read one or two which might have weight with them. Take for example the testimony of St. Cyprian, who wrote in A. D. 230:—

"'When the Lord gives the name of His body to bread, composed of the union of many particles, He indicates that our people, whose sins He bore, are united. And when He calls wine squeezed out from bunches of grapes His blood, He intimates that our flocks are similarly joined by the varied admixture of a united multitude."

"This distinctly implied, for all he knew, squeezing bunches of grapes. But there was more important testimony from one man who was considered by a certain party in the Church of great value—St. Thomas Aquinas, a great father of the 13th century. He said:—

"'The juice of ripe grapes, on the other hand, has already the form of wine; for its sweet taste evidences a mellowing change, which is its completion by natural heat (as it is said in the "Meteorologica," iv, 3, not far from the beginning), and for that reason this Sacrament can be fulfilled by the juice of grapes.'"

While in Egypt in 1884 I visited the American missionaries, and asked them what kind of wine they used as a communion wine in their churches. They told me that almost all of their members were from among the Copts, who are the descendants from the early Christians of Egypt, who have been comparatively isolated and separated from the Christian world for many centuries, and when they told them that the Western Christians used fermented wine, or "shop wine," as they called it, they were horrified at the idea, and would not partake of it; so they steeped or soaked raisins in water, and then pressed the juice from them and used that, as has been done by the Orthodox Jews when they could not obtain pure unfermented wine. I visited the Grand Patriarch of the Coptic Church, and through an interpreter he told me that he did the same, and that it was suitable for use the moment that it was pressed from the raisins. The day is not far distant when the members of the Western Christian churches will be as much horrified at the idea of using fermented wine as a sacramental wine as are the unperverted Christians of Egypt, and this will occur when our clergy and laity cease to be controlled by either strong confirmations or preconceived ideas or by sensual appetites, and can study the Sacred Scriptures and ancient history, and science and well-established facts, in the light of reason and common sense, instead of assuming everything which accords with their desires, and ignoring everything which conflicts therewith.

Again, the writer of the article I am reviewing says:—

"Drunkenness is always and everywhere a sin; whether drinking is a sin depends upon circumstances; and whether the circumstances are such as to make drinking sinful, each individual must decide for himself, and answer for his decision, not to a priesthood, a society, or a newspaper press, but to his own conscience and his God."

While drunk the drunkard is insane, and when not drunk he is an abject slave. His appetite controls him, soul and body; he will sacrifice his property, his reputation, and the comfort of wife and children to gratify it. If, gentle reader, you have witnessed the struggles which some have witnessed of men striving earnestly to break loose from that habit, you would not be so ready to pronounce drunkenness always a sin; you would hardly dare thus to judge the poor victim. God alone can realize what he suffers. I ask the intelligent reader, in the light of reason and common sense and of the Word of God, which is the greater sinner, the man who, after he has witnessed all the wretchedness, sorrows, drunkenness, and deaths which we see around us, deliberately takes his first glass of the fluid which has caused this misery, or continues to drink after he has once commenced, while he has the ability in freedom to restrain his appetite, or the man who, by thus drinking, has lost his freedom and reason, and then drinks to drunkenness? If either is a sinner, can there be any doubt as to which is the greatest sinner? A far greater number, die from steady drinking than from drunkenness; they die from an inability to withstand the ordinary causes of disease, or to resist diseased action when attacked, and vast multitudes die from diseases caused by so-called temperate drinking, short of drunkenness. The statistics of insurance companies show that the average duration of adult human lives is shortened from seventeen to twenty-four per cent. Is it no sin to enter upon or to continue such a life? Is such deliberate self-murder no sin? And again, no man living who commences and continues drinking can have any assurance that he will not become a drunkard. I well remember when a young man, perhaps eighteen years old, standing on my native New England hills, working upon the highway with a young man three or four years older than myself. I said to him that I thought it was well to make up our minds never to drink intoxicating drinks during health, and to join a temperance society; he differed from me, and he said that when he was tired, or went out in the cold and wet and got chilled, he thought that a little "cider brandy" did him good. "But," he exclaimed with great energy, "the man who cannot restrain his appetite is a fool! If you ever hear of my getting drunk, tell me, and I will quit drinking." I intimated to him that it then might be too late. Alas! alas for that young man! he became a drunkard; he spent the farm left by his father; his wife died; his children were scattered among friends; and years after, when I returned to my native town, I was told that he was a pauper at the poorhouse.

We are told by the reverend gentleman in the Christian Union that nature produces alcohol in the juices, as though its production was by a natural and orderly process. The process of fermentation is just as natural as the putrefaction of meat, when not prevented by care, and from an altogether similar cause; and as orderly as the eating of grain by rats if no care is taken to prevent it; and it is a no more natural or orderly process. The writer tells us that:—

"Whether the community can properly, without infringing on the liberty of the individual, prohibit all manufacture and sale of alcoholic liquors, is a political question, on which the life and teachings of Christ throw no light."

A strange statement, indeed! Is it not right to prohibit theft, highway robbery, and other evil acts? Do Christ's teachings throw no light upon such questions? "Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself." In our country the government is by the people and for the people, and voters are responsible for the laws made or unmade; and they should be governed by Christ's precepts and not by political cliques. We do not hesitate to enact laws to prohibit druggists and others from selling other well-known poisons to people without the prescription of a physician, for fear they may possibly be used by the purchasers to harm either themselves or others; and I presume the reverend writer does not seriously question the justice and propriety of such laws; yet, strange to say, we license men, and thus give the sanction of the law, to sell fermented wine, beer, and other intoxicating drinks, and allow them to sell tobacco, all deadly poisons, when they know the purchasers will use them to harm themselves and others, and often destroy their lives. Yes, we thus license men to sell when we know that these poisons are sold to men and women who are controlled by an unnatural appetite instead of by reason; when it is known that they have harmed and killed more of the human family than all other poisons put together, and that many of the purchasers, to say the least, will certainly use them to destroy health, reason, and their own lives, and to render their own families and all intimately associated with them unspeakably wretched and unhappy. And yet, exclaims the above writer, whether the community can prohibit such sales of alcoholic liquors or not, without infringing on the liberty of the individual, "is a political question, on which the life and teachings of Christ throw no light." And the inference is that Christians, preachers, and our religious press have nothing to do with this question. "O consistency! thou art a jewel." Let stealing become as universal as the selling of intoxicants, and wives and children thereby be deprived of their means of support as extensively as they are by the selling of intoxicants, would the reverend gentleman stand aloof, and represent that the life and teachings of Christ throw no light upon the question of prohibiting such a violation of the Divine commandments? Shall Christians stand aloof from enacting laws to prohibit stealing for fear of infringing on the liberty of individual thieves? Can crimes be prevented without interfering with the "personal liberty" of criminals to commit crimes?

What is stealing when compared to the selling of intoxicating drinks and tobacco as they are sold in our streets, and all over our own and other lands? Kind Christian parents, which in your estimation would be the greatest crime, and which would you prefer, that a thief should steal from your boy or son, before he is twenty-one years of age, or after you cease to be responsible for him, his money, or that a man should sell cigarettes, beer, fermented wine, or other intoxicants unbeknown to you, and take his money, giving these poisons instead, and thus leading him on step by step, until an unnatural appetite is formed, and he becomes a slave to the use of a poison often before he has reached the age when his rational faculties are fully developed; and when by the use of these poisons the full development of his body is prevented, and his prospects for enjoying good health thereafter and of living to the allotted age of man are most materially lessened. In both instances his money is taken, and we know, by the poverty-stricken men and women and young men we see visiting our saloons, that some of the saloonists, as well as the thief, will take his last penny. Which is the greatest crime, to steal a man's money who is under bondage to a perverted appetite, and consequently comparatively irresponsible for his acts, or to sell him the above named poisons, which so seriously prevent development and endanger his health, reason, and life, and which bring such wretchedness and sorrow to so many homes? In both instances the man's money is gone, his wife and children are deprived of the benefit which might result from its legitimate use; but in the one case the man returns to his family a sober, loving husband and father—in the other, perchance, drunk, or on the direct road that leads to drunkenness.

In reply to his intimation that the Bible permits Christians to use fermented wine, but the Koran does not allow Mohammedans to use it, I would simply intimate to the reverend gentleman that the Lord, in His good Providence, has permitted, through the Koran, the Mohammedans to be protected from the drinking of fermented wine and other intoxicating drinks, as He has attempted to protect Christians directly by the numerous warnings in His Word; but the difference lies right here—the former have heeded the warnings, while the latter have not, and hence the fearful drunkenness prevalent in Christian countries. And we see the people of Christian countries sending their whiskey into heathen or Gentile lands with their missionaries. Alas! alas! Which is better—to be a good heathen or a drunken Christian?

A gentleman whom I desired to see resides at Constantinople. He is an Englishman, and when my wife and myself were there in 1885 he had resided there twenty-two years, and had run the largest flouring mill in Turkey. We visited his mill, which was about two miles up the Golden Horn, and he spent an evening with us at the hotel where we were stopping. During our conversation I said to him: "I would like to know about the Mohammedan Turks: what kind of men are they? In our country you can hardly call a man by a worse name than to call him a Turk." He replied that the Government officials and those who come much in contact with foreigners are apt to be corrupt enough. "But," he exclaimed with great emphasis, "the laboring Turk! the laboring Turk has a great future before him!! If I want a man to row me down the Golden Horn when the weather is rough, or to watch my mills when I am away and asleep, who I know will do his duty faithfully, I always choose a Turk instead of a Christian." He admitted that the fact that they never drink fermented wine or other intoxicating drinks was one of the causes of their greater reliability.

"Hon. Chauncey M. Depew will scarcely be accused of fanaticism on the question of liquor drinking. His opinion as a man of wide observation and knowledge of human nature is valuable even to those who would discount his opinions on the political methods of dealing with the evil. Here is Mr. Depew's experience as stated in a speech before a company of railroad men:—

"'Twenty-five years ago I knew every man, woman, and child in Peekskill. And it has been a study with me to mark boys who started in every grade of life with myself, to see what has become of them. I was up last fall and began to count them over, and it was an instructive exhibit. Some of them became clerks, merchants, manufacturers, lawyers, doctors. It is remarkable that every one of those that drank is dead; not one living of my age. Barring a few who were taken off by sickness, every one who proved a wreck and wrecked his family did it from rum and no other cause. Of those who were church-going people, who were steady, industrious, and hard-working men, who were frugal and thrifty, every single one of them, without an exception, owns the house in which he lives and has something laid by, the interest on which, with his house, would carry him through many a rainy day. When a man becomes debased with gambling, rum, or drink, he does not care; all his finer feelings are crowded out. The poor women at home are the ones who suffer—suffer in their tenderest emotions; suffer in their affections for those whom they love better than life.'"—The Voice.

I think almost every man who is 75 years old, if he will look back and review carefully his youthful acquaintances, can bear almost if not equally as strong testimony as to the effects of intoxicating drinks on human life.

It is certain that but a small proportion of the drinkers who died prematurely were drunkards; they were simply what is called temperate drinkers.

I fully agree with the reverend writer in the Christian Union that we should not judge others to be bad or evil men because they do not speak and act just as we think they should, for we cannot see the motives from which their words and acts spring—they are known to the Lord alone; but should we not judge whether a man's words and acts are true and useful and in accordance with the Divine Commandments, or whether they are false and evil and in violation of the commandments? For instance, when we clearly see that the arguments in favor of fermented wine are all based upon assumptions which the most careful investigations by scholars as competent as any in the world show have no foundation in truth, and when we find from historical records that in all ages its use has caused an immense amount of suffering, wretchedness, drunkenness, and an untold number of premature deaths; and we see the same results following its use all around us at this day; and when science teaches us that its use is entirely unnecessary during health, and a direct violation of the laws of health and life; and when in the Sacred Scriptures fermented wine is likened, as to its effects on man, to the poison of dragons and the cruel venom of asps, and Solomon tells us that at last "it biteth like a serpent and stingeth like an adder;"—is it not clearly our duty to show to our fellow-men, and especially to the young, that to commence drinking fermented wine or beer, or to continue to drink so long as we have the power to resist the inclination to drink, is a violation of the commands, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God supremely, and not the gratification of a perverted appetite; and should we not as clearly as possible point out the truth, and call men to repentance and to the shunning of such evils as sins against God? How else is the world to be reformed and elevated, and the life of the New Jerusalem to descend from God out of heaven, and find an abiding place among men?

The boy, the young man, and those of all ages, in whom the regenerate life has either not commenced or has barely commenced, cannot be expected to live and act up to the Pauline maxim—"if meat cause my brother to offend," etc. Satisfy such that fermented wine is not the "cup of devils," but that it derives its life from the Lord through heaven instead of through hell, and that it is a good and useful drink, and that it is to be hoped the time will come when it can be safely drank, can they want any greater license for commencing and for continuing the life which leads to drunkenness? No one ever intends to become a drunkard or to destroy his life by drinking. He only drinks enough to satisfy his perverted appetite and to make him feel good; that is all.

Now, dear Christian reader, what can be more unfortunate for the Christian Church than for clergymen standing high in the Church, as do several who have written in favor of fermented wine, to write when they possess only such an extremely superficial knowledge of the wine question, in its Biblical, historical, scientific, and medical aspects, as is manifested in the article under review, and several others which have been printed and circulated within a few years? And how unfortunate that such articles should ever be published in religious periodicals that enter the homes where dwell children, and the young and innocent as well as drinkers! I thank the Lord that no religious paper bearing such seductive messages ever entered my father's house as I approached manhood.

The greatest obstacle which the grand temperance reformation has to encounter to-day is the stand publicly taken by so many of our clergy and religious periodicals in favor of fermented wine as a good and useful drink, and the use of intoxicating wine as a communion wine in so many of our churches. But the True Light has come into the world, and it will shine more and more until the perfect day.

As to tea and coffee, while they can hardly be compared with intoxicating drinks, tobacco, and opium, as to their injurious effects on man when he uses them, yet they are very far from being harmless; for, like the other poisons named, their use begets an unnatural appetite which healthy fluids will not satisfy, and they cause symptoms and diseases characteristic of the fluid taken. Tea causes sleeplessness, palpitation of the heart, and other symptoms, while coffee causes the "coffee headache," often destroys the morning appetite; if given to children, interferes with their development, interferes with digestion, and causes a variety of nervous symptoms about the chest and stomach. Parents make a great mistake and do their children great injustice when they allow them to taste of tea or coffee before they are twenty-one years of age, or until they have passed out from their control. If the young can be kept from becoming enslaved by such habits, and consequently remain in freedom, until their rational faculties are fully developed, in the increasing light of this new day, it will not be difficult for them to see that all such substances should be avoided. They do not add to one's enjoyment, for they, like intoxicants, tobacco, and all stimulating condiments, destroy or seriously impair the natural delicacy of taste with which the Lord has endowed us, when we eat or drink wholesome and needed articles of food. I am seventy-six years of age, yet I never had a better appetite, and food never tasted better than it does to-day; and I attribute this to my having so generally avoided improper articles of food and drink. After a most patient and careful examination of both sides of the wine question in the light of Divine Revelation, ancient history and of science, for many years, and after having witnessed the fearful demoralization, the wretchedness and sorrow, the diseases and deaths which result from drinking fermented wine and other intoxicants, nothing so surprises me, and discourages me, in regard to the immediate future of the American people, as the pertinacity and persistency with which so many of the clergy of our country, without any careful examination of both sides of this question, are striving to justify the use of fermented wine as a beverage and even as a Communion wine. Instead of assuming and ignoring everything, let the advocates of fermented wine answer the following inquiry by the Rev. Dr. Eliphalet Nott, President of Union College: "Can the same thing, in the same state, be good and bad; a symbol of wrath and a symbol of mercy; a thing to be sought after and a thing to be avoided? Certainly not. And is the Bible, then, inconsistent with itself? No, certainly."

End of Project Gutenberg's Personal Experience of a Physician, by John Ellis