of the delegated duty, and his declarations to the churches are remarkable, "It is good, "says he," neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine." Did the Apostle of the Gentiles not understand the will of the Council? It will scarcely be contended that in announcing it to be good neither to eat flesh nor drink wine, he transcended his powers or that he misrepresented the sentiments of this primitive Christian Council. Such an inference will not readily find a place in any mind, wishful to see the truth as it is in Jesus.
It is said that Peter, James and John were Fishermen with Zebedee their father; and yet says the justly celebrated Calmet, "they never ate, either fish or flesh or fowl." In brief, Christian Friends, there are many testimonies tending to induce the belief that the doctrine for which we are contending, was that maintained by the whole Christian Church for upwards of two hundred years. Philo, accordingly, in writing of the Christians of his own time, says "they not only abstain from eating flesh, but none can be found amongst them that voluntarily engage in manufacturing darts, arrows, swords, helmets, breast-plates, nor even such weapons as might be converted to bad purposes in time of peace; much less do any of them engage in war or its arts."
In opposition to our views, the language of our Redeemer, as delivered to the Pharisees will probably be cited; "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man;" But does any one seriously imagine, and really believe, that our Saviour, by this declaration meant to give full license to gluttony and intemperance, or that his followers, might eat or drink any thing with impunity which the Law of God had forbidden to be used? The sense in which these words were intended to be understood must be attained by a consideration of the reason and the occasion of their being spoken. The context informs us that the Pharisees, being offended, murmured at the disciples of
