ASCETICISM.
[TO THE EDITOR Or THE " SPECTATOR "1 SIR,—Has " Catholicus " reflected that our Lord in his own person pointedly disclaimed asceticism (if under that term he includes abstinence from food or drink) as a note of the highest religion (not that the word "religion" conveys any high meaning to me) when "the Son of Man came eating and drinking " (Matt. xi. 19; Luke vii. 34) ? No doubt " wisdom is justified of all her children" (Luke vii. 35), of the ascetic and of him that is not one. But, as St. Paul says in his broad reasonableness, " Meat " (i e., food) " commendeth us not to God, for neither if we eat are we the better, neither if we eat not are we the worse " (1 Cor. viii. 8). To abstain from food—to deprive ourselves in any way—for others' sakes is a virtue; to abstain for one's own sake, as a "note of religion," appears to me, as it surely did to St. Paul, a weakness.
And does not " Catholicns " see that to make abstinence "the most visible note of religion" is to do precisely that which our Lord commands ns not to do P "But then, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face, that thou appear not unto men to fast" (Matt. vi. 18). How can that which is not to appear unto men be a " most visible note" of
Christ's religion P—I am, Sir, &c., J. L.
[TO TEL EDITOR OF TEL " srzerms."]
Sin,—Luther may be linked in good fellowship with Dr. Johnson and the Son of Sirach as justifying the enjoyment of food :—" If our Lord God may make excellent large Pike and good Rhenish wine, I may very well venture to eat and to drink. Thou mayest enjoy every pleasure in the world that is not sinful; thy God forbids thee not, but much rather wills it. And it is pleasing to the dear God whenever thou rejoicest, or langhest from the bottom of thy heart." Set against this the confession (most pathetic it seems to me) of Peter Damiani, the great monk-Cardinal, that the sin he found it hardest to uproot was his disposition to laughter.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Trowell Rectory, April 5th. WRAY W. HUNT.
Previous page
