The Bible doesn't mention that our Lord drank wine.
I think it's important to look at Jesus in context of HIS time and culture place, and not our own. American puritans in particular always assumed Jesus never drank wine and that it was "grape juice", except the word used in the bible means "wine" not grape juice. Secondly, as Fr. Peter quoted, the Bible DOES say Jesus drank, and in fact Jesus himself said He did. (see the quotes Fr. Peter posted, and other verses similar in the Gospels) Jesus was accused of being a drunkard because He drank wine. This doesn't mean He was a drunk, people can have a glass of wine and NOT get drunk. It IS possible. I've seen it.
Also, Jesus was a first century Jew, and first centuries Jews drank wine, particularly at Passover. We know Jesus celebrated Passover, and thus it's logical to conclude He drank wine at the Passover Seder. (hence the reason we use wine for Communion, because Jesus did)
Wine is simply fermented grape juice, it's not some man made drug, but something natural that God has given us. (back to that in a moment) Remember, Jesus said it is not what goes into a man that defiles a man, but what comes out of a man that defiles.
So he could have abstained from it completely (plus I dont think it would make much sense that He would drink wine as the Perfect Role Model).
The problem I see, is that some people use the same logic to say not eating Kosher is a sin. The reasoning goes, if Jesus didn't do it, then we must not do it. Jesus abstained from Pork completely, because He was a Torah Observant Jew, (He alone kept every letter of the Law of Moses) and yet Christians are permitted to eat pork. (not that I'd recommend it...LOL!)
Just because Jesus DIDN'T eat pork doesn't mean we're not allowed. So even if you could prove Jesus never drank wine, doesn't automatically make it a sin per se, otherwise gentiles would have to keep Kosher.
With all that said, I NEVER drink alcohol, I am personally opposed to it, and find alcohol almost always causes more problems than it is worth. It can be expensive, and I simply do not like the smell of it....(yuck) I never have drank and never plan to, but I do not think it is a "sin", anymore than I think eating pork is a "sin".....everyone would probably be better off if they didn't drink, and certainly if they didn't eat pork, but a sin?
Certainly drinking CAN be a sin, just like eating CAN be a sin if done with the wrong intentions. But Christ came to transfigure the world, not to close it off from us. IMO, it makes Jesus MORE of "Role Model" if He did drank it, because He showed how it can be used in it's proper and Godly context. Anything God created can be abused, but just because it CAN be abused, doesn't mean the thing in itself is wrong or bad.
I certainly agree, alcohol can be really a bad thing if abused, and for ME personally, I believe it "might" be a sin for me to drink it, because I've always had this personal aversion to alcohol, and who knows, maybe I'm predisposed to alcoholism or something...I do not know, but for those who are able to NOT abuse it, I don't see a problem. In the end, it is probably easier and better just to say, "while not a sin, it's best to not drink" because it can become sinful pretty easily for some people, but the act itself of drinking alcohol is neutral. That's how I see it anyways.....
[quote author=NorthStar link=topic=7874.msg103769#msg103769 date=1244047702] the Bible DOES say Jesus drank, and in fact Jesus himself said He did.
So does that mean that His Grace Bishop Youssef was wrong when he said "Jesus did not say "a glutton and a winebibber" about himself. These were false accusations by the Pharisees"?
I think it means that you cannot expect the opinion of any person, whether bishop, priest or layman, to be infallible.
You must compare my opinion with that of the Fathers of the Church, with the opinion of all the other Orthodox Churches, and of course with that of our own priests and bishops. It is not a matter of dogma.
Certainly I agree with HG that the Pharisees were accusing our Lord of being a drunkard. I disagree with HG a little in that I do not believe that accusation would have any force at all if everyone knew that Jesus never drank any wine.
It would be like me accusing Ghandi of being a drunkard. It wouldn't make sense because he never drank wine AFAIK.
[quote author=peterfarrington link=topic=7874.msg103773#msg103773 date=1244048763] I think it means that you cannot expect the opinion of any person, whether bishop, priest or layman, to be infallible.
You must compare my opinion with that of the Fathers of the Church, with the opinion of all the other Orthodox Churches, and of course with that of our own priests and bishops. It is not a matter of dogma.
Certainly I agree with HG that the Pharisees were accusing our Lord of being a drunkard. I disagree with HG a little in that I do not believe that accusation would have any force at all if everyone knew that Jesus never drank any wine.
It would be like me accusing Ghandi of being a drunkard. It wouldn't make sense because he never drank wine AFAIK.
Father Peter
I see.. I guess I respect HGBY so much, I never thought he can be infallible ;), but your absolutely right. I shouldn't base the truth on one person's opinion. Thanks Father Peter.
It is difficult to disagree with bishops, especially ones so much loved as HGBY. But I would also expect, as you yourself have done, folk to disagree with me in a mutually respectful manner. I do know that there are other bishops who disagree with HGBY's interpretation, which gives me some sense that this is not a black and white matter, and there is some scope to respectfully disagree on this narrow point.
As to the wider issue of whether social consumption of alcohol is wise or useful, it seems to me that the Fathers are much more unananimous in considering it better to avoid such consumption, while also stating that such consumption is not sin on its own.
I agree that the consumption of alcohol is not a sin, but it's easily misused. I like the_least's analogy of the bridge, if you dont have to drink it, dont.. why not pass if it's offered to you and drink water instead? If I see something that MIGHT make me fall, I'd like to abstain from it completely, instead of telling myself I'm strong (and I know myself.. I'm not). People are different.. and the church isn't against the consumption of alcoho, but like HGBY said "Although this is the position of the church, it advocates complete abstinence from drinking because the possibility of abuse is usually very high." I wouldn't want to put myself on a hot spot is all I'm saying.
If I may add one little thing, I think one of the reasons the church seems to be (some people, clergy and laymen) growing stricter is the influence of some Muslims in Egypt. Some extremist Muslims take it upon themselves to try to make Christianity look like a vulgar religion, since we can drink alcohol (when they don't) and our women don't wear headveils (and their women are so "pure and decent")...
Many times have I heard Egyptian priests say things like: Ladies, some non-christians look at us and say we are not decent, don't let us give them the chance to do so, etc. you are the daughters of Christ, you have to dress decently etc etc. Same thing with alcohol!
I think it's a pity that we let some people's words get to us, especially since we know purity is in the heart first and formost.. yet sometimes under social pressure, we tend to maybe give in somewhat... (and yet, for a country where most women are veiled and most people carry some kind of religious sign or wear (both copts and muslims), Egypt's morals (both copts and muslims) are sadly very low at the moment, which is a generalization of course, but people who follow the news, know what I'm talking about.. If the outward expression of religion had been a true reflection of morals, then it would have been a completely different world...)
This might sound strange to people who are living in the West and who have been raised there, but in Egypt, going out for a drink, alcohol consumption, certain clothing items for ladies (that we consider decent) does not sound as normal as it might sound in the West, rather the culture makes 'drinking alcohol' something that is a sign of someone's indecency (since in Islam it is not allowed)
If i said here, I'm going out for a drink with friends, that sounds completely normal, but if a girl (or boy, but moreso if it's a lady) said that in Egypt, well, that's not as accepted there, a girl like that can be viewed badly by some..
as I said before, and as Father Peter mentioned, alcohol in itself is not a sin, but just as food it can lead to sin.. Let us not forbid that which is allowed (without becoming encouragers of it either..)
I asked my father of confession recently about drinking alcohol and he advised me saying that I should not drink alcohol by myself or without any reason i.e. I decide that I need a beer or so. He said that occasional drinking in family occasions/feasts is allowed but not to the extent that a person gets drunk or addicted. even though I dont drink, I thought to ask him to know what is allowed by the church and isnt considered a sin.
[quote author=Taishory link=topic=7874.msg103771#msg103771 date=1244048302] [quote author=NorthStar link=topic=7874.msg103769#msg103769 date=1244047702] the Bible DOES say Jesus drank, and in fact Jesus himself said He did.
So does that mean that His Grace Bishop Youssef was wrong when he said "Jesus did not say "a glutton and a winebibber" about himself. These were false accusations by the Pharisees"?
I know Fr. Peter has already answered this, but I'll just say that to me, for an accusation to have any power at all to influence someone to take a negative opinion, the accusation must have a grain of truth. The accusation that Jesus was a drunk was of course false, but it was made because Jesus was known to have had a cup of wine on ocassion, unlike John the baptist who was totally and severely ascetic. (I mean he ate honey and locusts, it doesn't get more ascetic than that...lol!)
It would have ZERO authority if everyone simply knew Jesus to NEVER drink, the Pharisees would have been laughed at, but they weren't....rumors spread and begin usually with some speck of truth, and then later get blown out of proportion.
It's like when atheists accuse Christians of "great evils" and then they leap to the conclusion because of this Christianity is false.....the accusation holds water because some Christians have done evil (or at least questionable) things, and some have even been proud of it. But then they take a giant leap of faith and assume because of that, Christianity is false. That's what the Pharisees did here I think, took a grain of truth, and made giant leaps from that.
However, when a news reporter here in the States once made an accusation towards the Amish community after an Amish school shooting, (he claimed that Amish people owned guns and went hunting so it made sense they'd be comfortable with guns in the classroom and thus these poor kids were killed because of their gun loving ways)..... the reporter was written off as a crackpot and laughed at (literally) because the accusation contained ZERO truth. He was horribly misinformed. (Amish NEVER own guns and the Amish children were killed by a NON-Amish person)
Jesus was also pretty clear to correct misunderstandings like this, as He always did with the Pharisees time and time again. Here no correction takes place, but he points out their hypocricy which was a double accusation, if you fast like John you're bad, if you drink like Jesus, you're bad. Jesus is pointing out they're basically being "two faced" here, no matter what you do you cannot please them. Indeed, Jesus was not a drunk, and THAT is the false accusation, but had he not been seen, at least once or twice drinking, the accusation couldn't have even been made. (which is why they didn't accuse John of being a drunk, because everyone knew he only ate honey and bugs...LOL!)
With that said, I also really like Bishop Yousef and always find his lectures quite enlightening and practical. having never heard/read this in context I cannot make a comment, but I bet there is a deeper context to his point that maybe we're not aware of. But that's total speculation on my part, nothing more.
Regarding the question about whether alcohol is permitted or not, let us remember that All things are pure for those who are pure (lol including alcohol).
i was reminded of the story of St. Macarius and how when he was eating with his brothers and they offered him wine he would take it for the sake of humility but for every cup he drank he spent a day without water.
so, as i said before, I think it all comes down to the reason you do it. if a reason does not exist, or your reason is something like "winding down" then you know you shouldn't do it. but, if your reason is something like st. Macarius' reason then it's obviously fine.
Also, i think back in the time of Jesus, people did not abuse substances as much as this perverted age we live in. Thus, because of this perverted age we live in we are more likely to fall for the abuse of the substance as oppose to someone living 2000 years ago. what i mean by "more likely to fall" is that there is more room for the devil to tempt us and thus making us more vulnerable. Does this make alcohol wrong? Absolutely not, it's just an unwise decision because you make things harder for yourself for no reason - because you put yourself in a situation where it is easy for the devil to tempt you and get you to fall. "A wise man fears and departs from evil, But a fool rages and is self-confident." (Proverbs 14:16) This thought of "I can" comes from self-confidence and pride because you forget that the Holy Spirit is what guides you to staying away from evil and sin and not your own power.
Thus, i think it is best in this case to go down the "easy" path and adopt St. Augustine's method, "complete abstinence is easier than perfect moderation" because there is no reward in going down the hard path but only more temptations.
Also, my priest's opinion on this is that either way we shouldn't drink, out of respect, because we use this substance in Church to transform into the Blood of Jesus for communion.
I am not sure that we can say that people drank less in the past. In Roman times they even worshipped a God of drunkneness, and it seems to me that the Bible and the writings of the Fathers would not be full of injunctions not to become drunk if it was not an issue with some people in the society around them.
There are many reasons to abstain from wine, but surely if we should abstain from wine because it is used in the communion, then we should also abstain from bread.
This is certainly a case where the personal advice of our own spiritual fathers, who know our own situations, is best. There can be no general advice other than to consume some alcohol is not generally a sin, but that it might be sin in any particular situation as our spiritual fathers instruct.
thanks for the clarification about drunkneness, i never knew that...it was just an assumption that i made. But, wouldn't you agree that it happens more frequently in this age than 2000 years ago?
also, no, we shouldn't also abstain from bread because the bread we use for communion is a different type of bread made just for that purpose. I certainly don't see anyone baking Korban at home and putting the stamp on it and eating it. But, you may argue that there are also different types of alcoholic beverages so should we only abstain from wine out of respect? i will answer (which is just a guess) that bread is a necessity whereas alcohol is not.
Just my opinion, but I don't think that drunkenness is any more common than in the distant past. Today, for instance, I have seen no drunken people. But when my ancestors all came from rural villagers they probably all headed to the village pub after work, it was the centre of the village. Certainly in the 18th century there was a massive problem with drunkenness in England.
In Roman times it seems that wine was one of the most important of trade goods, and it was plentiful and cheap. I quote..
'The Roman custom of appointing at dinners a magister bibendi whose commands for drinking had to be obeyed guaranteed frequent intoxication'.
and
'After the Roman conquest of the Italian peninsular and the rest of the Mediterranean basin (509-133 BC) the traditional Roman values of termperance, frugality and simplicity were gradually replaced by heavy drinking, ambition, degeneracy and corruption'.
and
'As the republic continued to decay, excessive drinking spread more and more, and some, such as Marc Antony, even took pride in their destructive drinking behaviour'.
I think we are agreed that it is not a sin in itself to consume alcohol, the many reasons to abstain from wine are the same as those which lead us to abstain from many foods, and to embark upon an ascetic lifestyle. I will again suggest a reading of this document by St Philoxenus..
I would appreciate your view on the teaching in this document if you are able find time to read it.
As in all ascetic endeavours, it seems best that we refrain from judging others in matters of eating or drinking. Whatever someone else eats or drinks is nothing for me to worry about, I need to be careful that I am not damaging my own spiritual growth and health by what I eat and drink.
I should also add that in England for centuries almost the whole population drank beer every day. There were three strengths of beer made from several fermentations. There was the strong, men's beer which was drunk in the evenings. There was the weaker beer which men and women drank ordinarily with meals. And there was the weakest beer that even children drank habitually.
This was because for a thousand years beer in England beer, since it was brewed from boiled water, was almost the only drink not likely to give you a waterborne disease.
I am not recounting this because I suggest that children should drink beer every day of course but because we need to also bear in mind that attitudes to alcohol are cultural and vary with time, place and situation. Indeed in the Irish monasteries of ancient times which were renowned for their strictness beer was still allowed in moderation and according to rule, not least because it was considered nourishing, and at times it has been classified as a food.
thanks Abouna, i will definitely read that after my exams.
As in all ascetic endeavours, it seems best that we refrain from judging others in matters of eating or drinking. Whatever someone else eats or drinks is nothing for me to worry about, I need to be careful that I am not damaging my own spiritual growth and health by what I eat and drink.
thanks Abouna for the "heads up" so that i don't fall into this sin of judgement; but, if i am asked by a teenager on this subject, i believe that i should answer wisely and give correct counseling. Correct? and if i see someone about to fall off that bridge, shouldn't i help him, just like you were helping me from falling for the sin of judgement?
Also, if you don't think that drunkenness is any more common than in the distant past (which i take your word for), what about young people. I am sure, 13 and 14 year-olds didn't get drunk back then (although this is just an assumption).
Also, concerning what you mentioned about how everyone use to drink beer in England, was substance abuse prevalent?
one more thing, I am just curious, are you familiar with term 'Abouna'?
I entirely agree with you that teenagers should be taught that it is not helpful or appropriate for them to be drinking alcohol. There are enough temptations for folk of that age that it is clear that they should not add even more. And it would be entirely appropriate to say to some folks who were going to go out for a drink - let's go do something else, and if they were Coptic Orthodox - it's not going to help us be more faithful if we go out drinking.
(But on the other hand, and this is not a major consideration, but on the other hand, in the context of family meals the French do allow their older children a small glass of wine with a meal, not least because they consider this teaches them a more responsible attitude to consuming alcohol. If it something they do with Mum and Dad then it doesn't have the same excitement as something done secretly with friends).
I am not sure that 13 or 14 year olds got drunk in the past. I know for sure that they did in the 18th century in England when there were serious issues with alcohol abuse and moral collapse in the growing urban centres. This was only stemmed in part by the Evangelical Revival which took place at the turn of the century. But we need not research that too much because it seems that there is no doubt that getting drunk is sin, and that encouraging others to get drunk is sin, and certainly here in the UK it is against the law to sell alcohol to under 18s, and in the US IIRC it is 21. So there is the matter of breaking the law as well in many cases. Let us be clear, I do not believe that those under the age of adulthood in a country should consume alcohol unless their parents allow them some small amount in accord with their own judgement and cultural context.
And those over the age of adulthood should be counselled that alcohol, like the internet, or music, or films, or indeed many other things they will have to deal with in their adult life, can be a cause of temptation and even sin, though they are not in themselves sinful. It seems to me that going out to drink would always be unwise for Orthodox Christians. But perhaps occasionally having a glass of wine, or a single beer with a meal in a social context is not unacceptable for an adult - bearing in mind the personal advice of one's spiritual father. This is only a general comment.
I don't think that during the period when beer was drunk universally there was more or less substance abuse. The small beer was very weak because it was so dilute. But the strong beer was plenty strong enough for those who wished to get drunk. The worst time in Britain was during the 18th century when gin and other spirits became very cheap and popular among the desperately poor. Indeed it was at this time that Temperance movements started. I am not sure what it is like in a US town, but I am sitting in a 100 year old residential area of my town, fairly working class accommodation, and within a short walk there are probably 7 or 8 pubs. These are all 100 years old as well. Many are small. They are essentially social clubs where people go for the evening and have a couple of drinks, perhaps a bite to eat, and chat with friends. The crowds of drunken youths tend to gather in the centre of town at the weekend.
It seems to me that the issue is that young Orthodox Christians need to be taught a mature attitude towards alcohol, which includes both moderation and abstention, and as in many things need to be helped to make the transition from childhood to adulthood safely. If we simply say that all alcohol consumption is sinful then I am not sure that they are encouraged to learn the proper lessons, they are just given another Christian Law to keep. But they must be taught that it is inappropriate, unhelpful and dangerous for them as children and teenagers to consume alcohol, and they must be taught the dangers of unmoderated consumption as they reach their late teens so that they can judge rightly as they set their hearts on Christ.
Yes, I am familiar with the term Abouna. I certainly don't mind being called Abouna, but here in the UK among British people the translation of Abouna as Father, which is the term for a priest, seems most useful and less confusing outside of our own Oriental Orthodox communities.
Since i was born in Egypt and Arabic was the first language i was taught, it makes me feel more like a son, when i call my Fathers, Abouna.
I totally agree with you though.
I just have one question, would you agree that it is an unwise decision as I said before, and when i mentioned this verse "A wise man fears and departs from evil, But a fool rages and is self-confident." (Proverbs 14:16) or am i interpreting this verse wrongly?
If you want to call me Abouna then go ahead. I have no problem with it at all, it is just in my own evangelistic work among British people it is easier to call myself Father Peter, than Abouna Peter because that adds an extra complication.
I cannot go so far as to say that any consumption of alcohol is an evil to be departed from, but much of the consumption of alcohol, especially among young adults, is certainly unwise and leads to sin.
I think that the problem resides in our hearts rather than in any particular act. Adam and Eve had sinned even before they stretched out their hands and took the forbidden fruit, and since sin is not a particular behavior but a deviation from setting he heart on God I think it can be said that even if God had removed every fruit tree from the Garden of Eden there was still the possibility of sin on behalf of Adam and Eve because it was their choice which was sin not the action.
That does not mean I am saying that consuming alcohol is always OK, rather I am saying that the sin is found in the wrong choice made before even a glass is filled. That wrong choice is not essentially the decision to consume alcohol since consuming alcohol is not in itself sinful, but it is in choosing to consume alcohol at the wrong time, in the wrong circumstances, for the wrong reasons and apart from a transparency towards God.
This verse you quote is very important, but I think it must be applied to the heart and not to actions as such. A man who does not actually consume alcohol but constantly wishes to consume alcohol, or is constantly caught up in thoughts of alcohol, has not departed from evil, even though outwardly he appear to be free from the weakness of immoderate consumption of evil.
We must fear and depart from evil when it arises as a thought in the heart. Therefore I agree with what I think is your unwritten thought - why should I wish to consume alcohol? If we are not able to honestly answer that question before God then we should abstain. I believe that the Bible shows us that it is possible to consume alcohol with thanksgiving towards God, but if we have a sense of needing to consume, or of wishing to use alcohol to escape from a situation, or if we wish to fit into a group, or if we are aware that to consume in a situation might well leave us open to attack, then it seems to me that the wise man steps back from such a choice in the heart and does not even approach the situation where he must choose whether or not to consume alcohol.
I do believe that some consumption of some alcohol in some circumstances is not sin at all. But for many of us the choice to consume alcohol is a choice we choose not to make, or not very often. Are we able to be open in thanksgiving to God in such consumption - that seems to me to be the issue. Drinking several pints of beer in a bar or a bottle of wine seems to me to lead away from sobriety and thankfulness before God and into a loss of self-control and perhaps sin. But adults consuming a glass of wine or a small beer or small cider with a meal once or twice a month does not seem to me to be in itself sinful.
I would not expect Orthodox Christians to drink alcohol during the seasons of fasting, nor on Wednesdays or Fridays, nor on Saturday evening before a Liturgy. Nor would I expect Orthodox Christians to leave an evening service at Church and consume alcohol. Therefore during large periods of the year I would not expect alcohol consumption to be an issue. I would not expect Orthodox Christians to 'go out drinking', but that does not seem to me to preclude adult Christians, at appropriate times of the year, going out for some other profitable activity and also having a moderate (a single glass for instance) amount of alcohol. When the aim of our activity is to consume alcohol then it seems to me we are already going wrong.
Again, I will suggest the text by St Philoxenus because he addresses the issue you raise, and puts the consumption of alcohol in the context of it not being sin but being liable to lead to sin, but he also goes beyond a simple moralism and shows that it is the desire which is sin, not the object itself, and he shows that even if we avoid wine we can so desire a cold glass of water that we fall into sin.
thanks Abouna, i learned a lot and i will definitely read the text you suggested and get back to you with any questions i may have, after my exams. Also, keep me in your prayers for my exams.
Thank you and may God continue to give you knowledge and wisdom so that you may nourish us with it.
I see you changed your signature to "Abouna Peter", Abouna, please do whatever you're comfortable with and used to.
That is true, lusting/wanting anything is considered a sin. If I want a banana because I have not had one for a while and I really crave for it then I can not control my body and I sinned. Or craving anything else that matters. I believe that the heart is what makes us sin or not, we have heard many stories about many of the church fathers doing certain actions, that would be considered sinful, to save the souls of their flock. Even though the action itself is a sin, but their heart chose to do so because it will lead to the repentance of one of god's children. I dont remember the exact words of the verse, but what goes into the mouth doesnt defile the body but what comes out of it. because it is coming out of the heart.
Isnt it better to just NOT drink. Even IF in moderation? what is the point? In that case, why dont you do every sin in moderation? That makes no sense right? so, staying out of temptaion will help you resist the temptation altogether.
Comments
Father Peter,
The Bible doesn't mention that our Lord drank wine.
I think it's important to look at Jesus in context of HIS time and culture place, and not our own. American puritans in particular always assumed Jesus never drank wine and that it was "grape juice", except the word used in the bible means "wine" not grape juice. Secondly, as Fr. Peter quoted, the Bible DOES say Jesus drank, and in fact Jesus himself said He did. (see the quotes Fr. Peter posted, and other verses similar in the Gospels) Jesus was accused of being a drunkard because He drank wine. This doesn't mean He was a drunk, people can have a glass of wine and NOT get drunk. It IS possible. I've seen it.
Also, Jesus was a first century Jew, and first centuries Jews drank wine, particularly at Passover. We know Jesus celebrated Passover, and thus it's logical to conclude He drank wine at the Passover Seder. (hence the reason we use wine for Communion, because Jesus did)
Wine is simply fermented grape juice, it's not some man made drug, but something natural that God has given us. (back to that in a moment) Remember, Jesus said it is not what goes into a man that defiles a man, but what comes out of a man that defiles.
The problem I see, is that some people use the same logic to say not eating Kosher is a sin. The reasoning goes, if Jesus didn't do it, then we must not do it. Jesus abstained from Pork completely, because He was a Torah Observant Jew, (He alone kept every letter of the Law of Moses) and yet Christians are permitted to eat pork. (not that I'd recommend it...LOL!)
Just because Jesus DIDN'T eat pork doesn't mean we're not allowed. So even if you could prove Jesus never drank wine, doesn't automatically make it a sin per se, otherwise gentiles would have to keep Kosher.
With all that said, I NEVER drink alcohol, I am personally opposed to it, and find alcohol almost always causes more problems than it is worth. It can be expensive, and I simply do not like the smell of it....(yuck) I never have drank and never plan to, but I do not think it is a "sin", anymore than I think eating pork is a "sin".....everyone would probably be better off if they didn't drink, and certainly if they didn't eat pork, but a sin?
Certainly drinking CAN be a sin, just like eating CAN be a sin if done with the wrong intentions. But Christ came to transfigure the world, not to close it off from us. IMO, it makes Jesus MORE of "Role Model" if He did drank it, because He showed how it can be used in it's proper and Godly context. Anything God created can be abused, but just because it CAN be abused, doesn't mean the thing in itself is wrong or bad.
I certainly agree, alcohol can be really a bad thing if abused, and for ME personally, I believe it "might" be a sin for me to drink it, because I've always had this personal aversion to alcohol, and who knows, maybe I'm predisposed to alcoholism or something...I do not know, but for those who are able to NOT abuse it, I don't see a problem. In the end, it is probably easier and better just to say, "while not a sin, it's best to not drink" because it can become sinful pretty easily for some people, but the act itself of drinking alcohol is neutral. That's how I see it anyways.....
the Bible DOES say Jesus drank, and in fact Jesus himself said He did.
So does that mean that His Grace Bishop Youssef was wrong when he said "Jesus did not say "a glutton and a winebibber" about himself. These were false accusations by the Pharisees"?
You must compare my opinion with that of the Fathers of the Church, with the opinion of all the other Orthodox Churches, and of course with that of our own priests and bishops. It is not a matter of dogma.
Certainly I agree with HG that the Pharisees were accusing our Lord of being a drunkard. I disagree with HG a little in that I do not believe that accusation would have any force at all if everyone knew that Jesus never drank any wine.
It would be like me accusing Ghandi of being a drunkard. It wouldn't make sense because he never drank wine AFAIK.
Father Peter
he laughed...
;)
I think it means that you cannot expect the opinion of any person, whether bishop, priest or layman, to be infallible.
You must compare my opinion with that of the Fathers of the Church, with the opinion of all the other Orthodox Churches, and of course with that of our own priests and bishops. It is not a matter of dogma.
Certainly I agree with HG that the Pharisees were accusing our Lord of being a drunkard. I disagree with HG a little in that I do not believe that accusation would have any force at all if everyone knew that Jesus never drank any wine.
It would be like me accusing Ghandi of being a drunkard. It wouldn't make sense because he never drank wine AFAIK.
Father Peter
I see.. I guess I respect HGBY so much, I never thought he can be infallible ;), but your absolutely right. I shouldn't base the truth on one person's opinion. Thanks Father Peter.
It is difficult to disagree with bishops, especially ones so much loved as HGBY. But I would also expect, as you yourself have done, folk to disagree with me in a mutually respectful manner. I do know that there are other bishops who disagree with HGBY's interpretation, which gives me some sense that this is not a black and white matter, and there is some scope to respectfully disagree on this narrow point.
As to the wider issue of whether social consumption of alcohol is wise or useful, it seems to me that the Fathers are much more unananimous in considering it better to avoid such consumption, while also stating that such consumption is not sin on its own.
Father Peter
Peace.
Many times have I heard Egyptian priests say things like: Ladies, some non-christians look at us and say we are not decent, don't let us give them the chance to do so, etc. you are the daughters of Christ, you have to dress decently etc etc.
Same thing with alcohol!
I think it's a pity that we let some people's words get to us, especially since we know purity is in the heart first and formost.. yet sometimes under social pressure, we tend to maybe give in somewhat...
(and yet, for a country where most women are veiled and most people carry some kind of religious sign or wear (both copts and muslims), Egypt's morals (both copts and muslims) are sadly very low at the moment, which is a generalization of course, but people who follow the news, know what I'm talking about..
If the outward expression of religion had been a true reflection of morals, then it would have been a completely different world...)
This might sound strange to people who are living in the West and who have been raised there, but in Egypt, going out for a drink, alcohol consumption, certain clothing items for ladies (that we consider decent) does not sound as normal as it might sound in the West,
rather the culture makes 'drinking alcohol' something that is a sign of someone's indecency (since in Islam it is not allowed)
If i said here, I'm going out for a drink with friends, that sounds completely normal, but if a girl (or boy, but moreso if it's a lady) said that in Egypt, well, that's not as accepted there, a girl like that can be viewed badly by some..
as I said before, and as Father Peter mentioned, alcohol in itself is not a sin, but just as food it can lead to sin..
Let us not forbid that which is allowed (without becoming encouragers of it either..)
God Bless
even though I dont drink, I thought to ask him to know what is allowed by the church and isnt considered a sin.
[quote author=NorthStar link=topic=7874.msg103769#msg103769 date=1244047702]
the Bible DOES say Jesus drank, and in fact Jesus himself said He did.
So does that mean that His Grace Bishop Youssef was wrong when he said "Jesus did not say "a glutton and a winebibber" about himself. These were false accusations by the Pharisees"?
I know Fr. Peter has already answered this, but I'll just say that to me, for an accusation to have any power at all to influence someone to take a negative opinion, the accusation must have a grain of truth. The accusation that Jesus was a drunk was of course false, but it was made because Jesus was known to have had a cup of wine on ocassion, unlike John the baptist who was totally and severely ascetic. (I mean he ate honey and locusts, it doesn't get more ascetic than that...lol!)
It would have ZERO authority if everyone simply knew Jesus to NEVER drink, the Pharisees would have been laughed at, but they weren't....rumors spread and begin usually with some speck of truth, and then later get blown out of proportion.
It's like when atheists accuse Christians of "great evils" and then they leap to the conclusion because of this Christianity is false.....the accusation holds water because some Christians have done evil (or at least questionable) things, and some have even been proud of it. But then they take a giant leap of faith and assume because of that, Christianity is false. That's what the Pharisees did here I think, took a grain of truth, and made giant leaps from that.
However, when a news reporter here in the States once made an accusation towards the Amish community after an Amish school shooting, (he claimed that Amish people owned guns and went hunting so it made sense they'd be comfortable with guns in the classroom and thus these poor kids were killed because of their gun loving ways)..... the reporter was written off as a crackpot and laughed at (literally) because the accusation contained ZERO truth. He was horribly misinformed. (Amish NEVER own guns and the Amish children were killed by a NON-Amish person)
Jesus was also pretty clear to correct misunderstandings like this, as He always did with the Pharisees time and time again. Here no correction takes place, but he points out their hypocricy which was a double accusation, if you fast like John you're bad, if you drink like Jesus, you're bad. Jesus is pointing out they're basically being "two faced" here, no matter what you do you cannot please them. Indeed, Jesus was not a drunk, and THAT is the false accusation, but had he not been seen, at least once or twice drinking, the accusation couldn't have even been made. (which is why they didn't accuse John of being a drunk, because everyone knew he only ate honey and bugs...LOL!)
With that said, I also really like Bishop Yousef and always find his lectures quite enlightening and practical. having never heard/read this in context I cannot make a comment, but I bet there is a deeper context to his point that maybe we're not aware of. But that's total speculation on my part, nothing more.
so, as i said before, I think it all comes down to the reason you do it. if a reason does not exist, or your reason is something like "winding down" then you know you shouldn't do it. but, if your reason is something like st. Macarius' reason then it's obviously fine.
Also, i think back in the time of Jesus, people did not abuse substances as much as this perverted age we live in. Thus, because of this perverted age we live in we are more likely to fall for the abuse of the substance as oppose to someone living 2000 years ago. what i mean by "more likely to fall" is that there is more room for the devil to tempt us and thus making us more vulnerable. Does this make alcohol wrong? Absolutely not, it's just an unwise decision because you make things harder for yourself for no reason - because you put yourself in a situation where it is easy for the devil to tempt you and get you to fall. "A wise man fears and departs from evil, But a fool rages and is self-confident." (Proverbs 14:16) This thought of "I can" comes from self-confidence and pride because you forget that the Holy Spirit is what guides you to staying away from evil and sin and not your own power.
Thus, i think it is best in this case to go down the "easy" path and adopt St. Augustine's method, "complete abstinence is easier than perfect moderation" because there is no reward in going down the hard path but only more temptations.
prayers
I am not sure that we can say that people drank less in the past. In Roman times they even worshipped a God of drunkneness, and it seems to me that the Bible and the writings of the Fathers would not be full of injunctions not to become drunk if it was not an issue with some people in the society around them.
There are many reasons to abstain from wine, but surely if we should abstain from wine because it is used in the communion, then we should also abstain from bread.
This is certainly a case where the personal advice of our own spiritual fathers, who know our own situations, is best. There can be no general advice other than to consume some alcohol is not generally a sin, but that it might be sin in any particular situation as our spiritual fathers instruct.
Father Peter
also, no, we shouldn't also abstain from bread because the bread we use for communion is a different type of bread made just for that purpose. I certainly don't see anyone baking Korban at home and putting the stamp on it and eating it. But, you may argue that there are also different types of alcoholic beverages so should we only abstain from wine out of respect? i will answer (which is just a guess) that bread is a necessity whereas alcohol is not.
also, you said what are they?
Just my opinion, but I don't think that drunkenness is any more common than in the distant past. Today, for instance, I have seen no drunken people. But when my ancestors all came from rural villagers they probably all headed to the village pub after work, it was the centre of the village. Certainly in the 18th century there was a massive problem with drunkenness in England.
In Roman times it seems that wine was one of the most important of trade goods, and it was plentiful and cheap. I quote..
'The Roman custom of appointing at dinners a magister bibendi whose commands for drinking had to be obeyed guaranteed frequent intoxication'.
and
'After the Roman conquest of the Italian peninsular and the rest of the Mediterranean basin (509-133 BC) the traditional Roman values of termperance, frugality and simplicity were gradually replaced by heavy drinking, ambition, degeneracy and corruption'.
and
'As the republic continued to decay, excessive drinking spread more and more, and some, such as Marc Antony, even took pride in their destructive drinking behaviour'.
I think we are agreed that it is not a sin in itself to consume alcohol, the many reasons to abstain from wine are the same as those which lead us to abstain from many foods, and to embark upon an ascetic lifestyle. I will again suggest a reading of this document by St Philoxenus..
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/philoxenus_discourse11.htm
I would appreciate your view on the teaching in this document if you are able find time to read it.
As in all ascetic endeavours, it seems best that we refrain from judging others in matters of eating or drinking. Whatever someone else eats or drinks is nothing for me to worry about, I need to be careful that I am not damaging my own spiritual growth and health by what I eat and drink.
Father Peter
This was because for a thousand years beer in England beer, since it was brewed from boiled water, was almost the only drink not likely to give you a waterborne disease.
I am not recounting this because I suggest that children should drink beer every day of course but because we need to also bear in mind that attitudes to alcohol are cultural and vary with time, place and situation. Indeed in the Irish monasteries of ancient times which were renowned for their strictness beer was still allowed in moderation and according to rule, not least because it was considered nourishing, and at times it has been classified as a food.
Father Peter
Also, if you don't think that drunkenness is any more common than in the distant past (which i take your word for), what about young people. I am sure, 13 and 14 year-olds didn't get drunk back then (although this is just an assumption).
Also, concerning what you mentioned about how everyone use to drink beer in England, was substance abuse prevalent?
one more thing, I am just curious, are you familiar with term 'Abouna'?
I entirely agree with you that teenagers should be taught that it is not helpful or appropriate for them to be drinking alcohol. There are enough temptations for folk of that age that it is clear that they should not add even more. And it would be entirely appropriate to say to some folks who were going to go out for a drink - let's go do something else, and if they were Coptic Orthodox - it's not going to help us be more faithful if we go out drinking.
(But on the other hand, and this is not a major consideration, but on the other hand, in the context of family meals the French do allow their older children a small glass of wine with a meal, not least because they consider this teaches them a more responsible attitude to consuming alcohol. If it something they do with Mum and Dad then it doesn't have the same excitement as something done secretly with friends).
I am not sure that 13 or 14 year olds got drunk in the past. I know for sure that they did in the 18th century in England when there were serious issues with alcohol abuse and moral collapse in the growing urban centres. This was only stemmed in part by the Evangelical Revival which took place at the turn of the century. But we need not research that too much because it seems that there is no doubt that getting drunk is sin, and that encouraging others to get drunk is sin, and certainly here in the UK it is against the law to sell alcohol to under 18s, and in the US IIRC it is 21. So there is the matter of breaking the law as well in many cases. Let us be clear, I do not believe that those under the age of adulthood in a country should consume alcohol unless their parents allow them some small amount in accord with their own judgement and cultural context.
And those over the age of adulthood should be counselled that alcohol, like the internet, or music, or films, or indeed many other things they will have to deal with in their adult life, can be a cause of temptation and even sin, though they are not in themselves sinful. It seems to me that going out to drink would always be unwise for Orthodox Christians. But perhaps occasionally having a glass of wine, or a single beer with a meal in a social context is not unacceptable for an adult - bearing in mind the personal advice of one's spiritual father. This is only a general comment.
I don't think that during the period when beer was drunk universally there was more or less substance abuse. The small beer was very weak because it was so dilute. But the strong beer was plenty strong enough for those who wished to get drunk. The worst time in Britain was during the 18th century when gin and other spirits became very cheap and popular among the desperately poor. Indeed it was at this time that Temperance movements started. I am not sure what it is like in a US town, but I am sitting in a 100 year old residential area of my town, fairly working class accommodation, and within a short walk there are probably 7 or 8 pubs. These are all 100 years old as well. Many are small. They are essentially social clubs where people go for the evening and have a couple of drinks, perhaps a bite to eat, and chat with friends. The crowds of drunken youths tend to gather in the centre of town at the weekend.
It seems to me that the issue is that young Orthodox Christians need to be taught a mature attitude towards alcohol, which includes both moderation and abstention, and as in many things need to be helped to make the transition from childhood to adulthood safely. If we simply say that all alcohol consumption is sinful then I am not sure that they are encouraged to learn the proper lessons, they are just given another Christian Law to keep. But they must be taught that it is inappropriate, unhelpful and dangerous for them as children and teenagers to consume alcohol, and they must be taught the dangers of unmoderated consumption as they reach their late teens so that they can judge rightly as they set their hearts on Christ.
Yes, I am familiar with the term Abouna. I certainly don't mind being called Abouna, but here in the UK among British people the translation of Abouna as Father, which is the term for a priest, seems most useful and less confusing outside of our own Oriental Orthodox communities.
God bless
Father Peter
I totally agree with you though.
I just have one question, would you agree that it is an unwise decision as I said before, and when i mentioned this verse "A wise man fears and departs from evil, But a fool rages and is self-confident." (Proverbs 14:16) or am i interpreting this verse wrongly?
If you want to call me Abouna then go ahead. I have no problem with it at all, it is just in my own evangelistic work among British people it is easier to call myself Father Peter, than Abouna Peter because that adds an extra complication.
I cannot go so far as to say that any consumption of alcohol is an evil to be departed from, but much of the consumption of alcohol, especially among young adults, is certainly unwise and leads to sin.
I think that the problem resides in our hearts rather than in any particular act. Adam and Eve had sinned even before they stretched out their hands and took the forbidden fruit, and since sin is not a particular behavior but a deviation from setting he heart on God I think it can be said that even if God had removed every fruit tree from the Garden of Eden there was still the possibility of sin on behalf of Adam and Eve because it was their choice which was sin not the action.
That does not mean I am saying that consuming alcohol is always OK, rather I am saying that the sin is found in the wrong choice made before even a glass is filled. That wrong choice is not essentially the decision to consume alcohol since consuming alcohol is not in itself sinful, but it is in choosing to consume alcohol at the wrong time, in the wrong circumstances, for the wrong reasons and apart from a transparency towards God.
This verse you quote is very important, but I think it must be applied to the heart and not to actions as such. A man who does not actually consume alcohol but constantly wishes to consume alcohol, or is constantly caught up in thoughts of alcohol, has not departed from evil, even though outwardly he appear to be free from the weakness of immoderate consumption of evil.
We must fear and depart from evil when it arises as a thought in the heart. Therefore I agree with what I think is your unwritten thought - why should I wish to consume alcohol? If we are not able to honestly answer that question before God then we should abstain. I believe that the Bible shows us that it is possible to consume alcohol with thanksgiving towards God, but if we have a sense of needing to consume, or of wishing to use alcohol to escape from a situation, or if we wish to fit into a group, or if we are aware that to consume in a situation might well leave us open to attack, then it seems to me that the wise man steps back from such a choice in the heart and does not even approach the situation where he must choose whether or not to consume alcohol.
I do believe that some consumption of some alcohol in some circumstances is not sin at all. But for many of us the choice to consume alcohol is a choice we choose not to make, or not very often. Are we able to be open in thanksgiving to God in such consumption - that seems to me to be the issue. Drinking several pints of beer in a bar or a bottle of wine seems to me to lead away from sobriety and thankfulness before God and into a loss of self-control and perhaps sin. But adults consuming a glass of wine or a small beer or small cider with a meal once or twice a month does not seem to me to be in itself sinful.
I would not expect Orthodox Christians to drink alcohol during the seasons of fasting, nor on Wednesdays or Fridays, nor on Saturday evening before a Liturgy. Nor would I expect Orthodox Christians to leave an evening service at Church and consume alcohol. Therefore during large periods of the year I would not expect alcohol consumption to be an issue. I would not expect Orthodox Christians to 'go out drinking', but that does not seem to me to preclude adult Christians, at appropriate times of the year, going out for some other profitable activity and also having a moderate (a single glass for instance) amount of alcohol. When the aim of our activity is to consume alcohol then it seems to me we are already going wrong.
Again, I will suggest the text by St Philoxenus because he addresses the issue you raise, and puts the consumption of alcohol in the context of it not being sin but being liable to lead to sin, but he also goes beyond a simple moralism and shows that it is the desire which is sin, not the object itself, and he shows that even if we avoid wine we can so desire a cold glass of water that we fall into sin.
God bless
Abouna Peter
Thank you and may God continue to give you knowledge and wisdom so that you may nourish us with it.
I see you changed your signature to "Abouna Peter", Abouna, please do whatever you're comfortable with and used to.
what is the point? In that case, why dont you do every sin in moderation?
That makes no sense right? so, staying out of temptaion will help you resist the temptation altogether.
+mahraeel+
In that case, why dont you do every sin in moderation?
you can't say that,
first of all as we have already established, drinking as in the action itself is not a sin.
your statement doesn't make sense.
+mahraeel+
But gluteny (spelling ??) is. If we eat too much, then it is a sin. Same with alcohol, if we drink too much then we get drunk and it becomes a sin.
Didn't king David drink wine? I believe so.