The Bible Opposed to Prohibition

Southland Times, Issue 19553, 6 May 1905, Page 4

The Bible Opposed to Prohibition

(Published under arrangement with Mi - W. Thomson.) IVhat rule has God given to direct us how wo may (glorify and enjoy J lim ?' Answer : The Word of God which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments is the only rule to direct us how wje may glorify and enjoy Him.

Every Presbyterian throughout the length and breadth of New Zealand snows where these words coma from. They are from the Shorter Catechism, which Scotch people, less than 30 years ago and most of them now, esteem os sacred only to the Bible itself. The very first question which Presbyterian ministers and elders are required to answer ot their ordination is "Do ‘you believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be '..he Word of God and the only rule of faith and duty?' 1 . Ibto words I have quoted from the Shorter Catechism aro stamped with a peculiar majesty, being, as they are, the expression of the most matured wisdom of the divines of the great Westminster Assembly. Every student knows the history of that great Assembly, which was called by the authority of the Long Parliament and assisted in its deliberations by commissioners from the Church ol Scotland, every one of v hom was distinguished for his great piety, zeal and learning. It continued its sittings for the long period of nearly six years, and it is not too much to say that no Protestant Assembly in Britain held before

IG4O or after 1648 could compare with the Westminster Assembly, the results ot whose labours affect every Presbyterian Church throughout the world in this hour. The men of the Westminster Assembly- took up tWo great position that tho Bible is tCi'o Word of God and the only infallible rule or faith and duty. I lay emphasis on the word ’’ only." According to them there can be no obher rule of conduct. CONSCIENCE, THEREFORE, CANNOT GUIDE either the individual or the Church, for the conscience itself must bo enlightened in the Word of God, and inly when it directs the soul according to that Word is it right ; otherwise, it is no safe guide. The question, therefore, of supremo importance to every Presbyterian is .not wthat tho Assemblies of his church may say, not what hist justor may utter from tho pulpit, but what il’-es his Bible say, and if the deliverances of the Assemblies or the utterances of his pastor are contradictory or opposed to it, he is in duty bound, as a faithful Presbyterian, to reject them. That he. has an absolute right to judge anything that an Assembly does, or that his pastor teaches in tho light of the Bible, is freely conceded. In this light I propose to ask tho question : ” Does the Bible teach prohibition ?’’ or "Is the Bible opposed to prohibition 7” These are questions of the utmost importance, for If it could bo proved that the Bible supports prohibition it would be my duty—r.he duty, too, of every Protestant (especially every Presbyterian)—to support prohibition at all hazards. Nothing should or could bo allowed—money, gdods, property, reputation —to prevent us from supporting prohibition with all our heart and with all our strength. If. on the other hand, the Bible is opposed to prohibition, it .is the duty of every Protestant—and again, I say, especially is it every Presl.yterlan’s duty—to offer every resistance in his power to the prohibitory movement. Nor should anything—odium, unpopularity, loss of friends, or fear iff Misrepresentation—prevent anyone from oherine. the most detenmined opposition to prohibition. THE CALL OF DUTY is abtrve all and beyond all, for it is tho summons of conscience, and conscience is thus guided by the Word cd God: “The only infallible rule of faith and duty.” To disobey? for f.iar of the innuendoes which may be sent trailing round, is “to lap ttre coward’s milk ” and to glay loose with one's conscience, which is neither safe nor right to do. li, therefore, wo turn to Scripture to find something to guide us in this perennial agitation, we are immediately struck with the world-wide difference between the religion of the .bible and othu: cosmic religions. The Bible breathes an atmosphere of freedom, which constitutes the Word of God, and is its own highest evidence for the validity to the claim which it makes. Mohammedanism, the highest of all cifsmic religions, is salvation by the observance ot innumerable minutiae, and while it may serve well enough for a battle-cry, in the long run, as Dr Dods has pointed out, it throws out "a putrid scum." The .Bible calls nothing common or unclean ; Mohammedanism brands many things as both common and unclean. The Bible lays down tho principle " that whether we eat or drink, or whatsoever we ao, we must do all to the glory of God ” : Mohammedanism declares it to be a violation di principle to eat or drink certain things, for thereby God and the prophet are dishonoured. Salvation, ’herefore, according to tho Koran, unlike the Bible, consists not in a purified state of heart, but much more in the observance of endless commandments, and it he more strictly they are kept the holier ‘.he Moslem, while *h<e who may be -i different about them is regarded as little? better than, an infidel dog-

WHICH HAS PRODUCED THE NOBLER TYPE OF HUMANITY?

it is unnecessary to affirm. The I oivl age of the East and tho freedom of flu West stand out in striking contrast be fore the ■iqorld at this hour. ATohamme danism, the religion of the East ant

prohibition, has succeeded in withering the intellect, in effectually blocking progress, and in blighting some of the fairest hearts of Europe. Fanaticism is the natural result of Mohammedanism, it also is of all rel’gions ul.’ich lay stress on externalism. Christianity, which makes no appeal to the sword, and does not trust to the pciiceman as prohibition does, has succeeded in emancipating the West, and has raised the AngloSaxon people at least i*» the position oi saviours of the world. It accomplished this by its freedom, its '.ppeal to the heart, its toleration, and the dignity it conferred upon the individual by teaching him that he Is not an automaton which may bo necessary in a chain of events, but a responsible being, endowed with' great faculties and created fjr a great destiny.' Not from Genesis to Itevalation is there one single text which can’ lie construed in favour of prohibition. The testimony of the Law and the Prophets, itself pointing .1, a Greater Day, is uniformly opposed 10 it. and when at length the true Light " which ligfhfteth every man that cometh into the world" stepped into the snheie of humanity to fulfil both, His exanplc was opposed to prohibition. Jesus Christ, Who gave an example for all time, for all nations and men, in every col ccivalfle circumstance and condition, was rot only not a total abstainer, for He drank wino He also made wine in abundance for the marriage feast in Cana, and was branded by tfee ecclesiastical Pharisees of his day as a gluttonous man and a winebibber (one who drinks wine) and u friend of publicans and s : nners. Prohibition is therefore directly contraty to the example of Christ, and no Presbyterian who is bound in his conscience by the example of Christ can support it. (To be continued.)