Untitled

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 508, 26 August 1871, Page 2

" Grahamstown, Aagust 24. "Sir,—ln reply to youru of August tho 19th, I beg to say that I do not intend publishing tha lecture to which you refer ; nor shall I enter into controversy on the matter. With the heat of temper already manifested, no good that I can see could result from rloing so. I take tin's opportunity, however, of correcting, once for all, souio of the misconceptions which aro current as to what vvus really said :—

"I. No reference was made ia tho lecture to the 'traffic' in intoxicating drinks; nor, in my opinion, did the exposition of tho miracle call for any.

"2. The class of total abstainers was not assailed anywhere throughout the discourse.

" 3. What I did contend for was, that the fact of our Lord making the water wine for the marriage feast, warranted the inference that it was not sinful to touch intoxicating drinks ; that to unohristiatuso a man because he did so was fanaticism ; that the decision must be left to the judgment and conscience of each individual.

" These are my deliberate sentiments still; and, in my belief, they arc bused upon the fairest and soundest interpretation of the passage in question.

" I take the liber: y of adding that whilst 1 should sincenly luineiit giving pain to any man, no amount of c'amour shall deter mo from expounding tho Word of God according to my conviction of its honest meaning, whether in relation to this question of total abatinenco, or any other.—l remain, &c,

"J. T. Wablow Davids, M.A. " Mr. 0. Lewis. "P.S.—I shall furnish the papers with a copy of this correspondence."