GAMBLING—ALDIS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9241, 19 December 1888, Page 6

GAMBLING—ALDIS.

TO THE EDITOR. Sin, —I am glad that Professor Aldis has brought before you for your decision the subject of church bazaars. When some years ago I came into the charge of an Auckland congregation, I attended, as a matter of course, a bazaar got up by my people to pay oiF our debt. I had never attended a bazaar before, and was sq shocked and disgusted at what I saw that I beat a retreat as soon as possible and went straight home to my books to try and ascertain what gambling is. I got 110 satisfaction from them, and have always carefully read what I came across in print on the subject, with the same result. Professor A. lectured once 011 the subject of gambling. " Now," said I, " my difficulties will get their quietus." "No; he lias not grasped the principle of the question." As far as I can recollect, his definition was something like what he states in his letter of this day, viz., "getting by a lucky chance something that is not paid for." This, I submit, is too loose. They drew lots for land and various other purposes, under the Jewish economy, and the lot seems recognised in Scripture (Proverbs xviii. 18 and xvi. .'vi). Supposing a picture worth .€IOO was left between Professor A. and me, should we be wrong in drawing lots as to who should get £50 of the other share Suppose I search for a gold mine, and thus seek to get what I "never paid for," am I wrong? Suppose a merchant imports grain bought at a low price in hopes of a chance rise in prices, is he wrong? Would two Rothschilds be guilty of gambling if they played for sixpences ? The conscience of the Christian revolts against gambling, and yet he feels that our theologians have failed to bring it under any prohibition of Scripture; that when they condemn it, they condemn also other kinds of acts that are clearly justifiable. Now agreeing, as I do, with Professor Aldis on this question, I should be very glad, for mine own benefit, if he would allow me to draw him out into a more accurate view of the case. The evils of gambling are evident. It is a demoralising vice, to be classed with drunkenness. A non-tem-perance man would say, " Drink with moderation." Professor Aldis would not say this was a sin, or was even wrong. What if another were to say, "Play with moderation ; the sin is in the excess ?" So another will say, "Go to the theatre, but do not make a practice of it." Another will sav " It is very wrong to go to a theatre at all * I again should be sorry to be seen enter a public-house, even to ask foe a sub

scnption, much less for a glass. Now from all this I have concluded 1. hat playing for stakes is not in itself a sin or wronc 2. The evil comes when certain bounds are passed. 3. That attwe preserve our children from habits that will surely grow into evil if indulged, so the Christian will not foster in his child a taste for gambling—and that was the fault of th 6 .Baptist Sunday-school. Send your child to the theatre, to the publichouse, to the racecourse, to the boxine ring, and we can easily foretell what course of life that boy will follow. 4. If I am asked, to what Scriptural rule would you refer in the matter of gambling, I would refer to Jude 23. Gambling is a leprous spotted garment, very unfit for Sundayschool children. It excites also and feeds the lusts, the basest " Lusts of the flesh, which war against the soul" (St. Pet., ii., 11). To regard it as a violation of the 10th Commandment is, I think, to expose one's self to questions which it would be difficult to answer.— I am, &c., Clericus.