THE DIVINE ORDINANCE IN REFERENCE TO BLOOD-EATING. PART I. "But flesh, with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." THIS is a command to abstain from blood, which should be binding upon all men, even to this day. Before the deluge the herbs and fruits were given to man, but after his disobedience and corruption, flesh was allowed, and we cannot believe that it was then first introduced to Noah; but, on the contrary, that God permitted it to man because he would not abstain from it. The context, (where the consequence of eating flesh is foretold), sufficiently explains this. "The blood of your lives will I require, at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man ;" which we understand to point out that man's life would be shortened, and that evil passions would be raised, causing men to kill each other. The best food for man is then, according to Scripture, undoubtedly the first grant (the herbs and fruits) which God saw was good; flesh was permitted on account of man's acquired taste and degraded nature. With these observations, showing, that even without the blood, animal food is only permitted, we shall proceed to point out that the very important command to abstain from blood, has now been as effectually forgotten by the enlightened nations of Christianity, and with as little reason, as the great first grant was previously forgotten and considered nought; whereas, both in the first command to eat the proper food, which stood until the flood, and in the second command, to abstain from blood, which was confirmed by the Apostles, and is incumbent upon us to this day, very important principles are involved. In fact, from this abstinence being enjoined, we should learn how very careful men ought to be to preserve the purity of their blood. For physiology and experience now make it evident to us that animal food does shorten life, and is the cause of disease and evil passions, and also that with the blood in it, the injurious effects are more apparent. Blood was prohibited to Noah, and to all mankind. At the giving of the law, and at several times during the ministry of Moses the prohibition was most solemnly and awfully renewed. Hence the Jews have not eaten blood either before or after the Christian era. That the prohibition has been renewed by the Apostles in council assembled, and under the authority of the Holy Spirit, none can doubt, who read without prejudice Acts xv. 28, 29, and Acts xxi. 25. It is singular how custom causes the majority to shut their eyes, their ears, and their understanding while reading so very plain a passage as that in the 15th Chapter of Acts: "It seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and unto us to impose upon you no greater burden than these necessary things, that ye abstain from meat offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which, if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well." Now this was written to the Christians converted from the Gentiles; and it is clear that as the Jewish converts would already abstain from blood, the apostles here decreed that all converts to Christianity were in this respect to obey the law. In these days men are apt to conclude that ever since the time of the apostles there has been a different practice; but this is an error. There is good evidence that for the first thousand years of the Christian era it was considered part of a Christian's duty to abstain from blood. Now if this be the fact, and if so much pains was taken to preserve that law among the Jews, which was also a general prohibition when the permission was given to Noah to eat flesh, it must be concluded that the same law is still in force, for there has been no authority to set it aside since the apostles. The precept given to Noah is: "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." Who shall say that this law, so divinely ordained and confirmed by the apostolic decree, is not of importance to Christians? The laws of Moses were strictly physiological, and in as far as they were obeyed by the Jews, enabled them to retain their health and vigour. It is maintained that the Christian dispensation is purely moral and spiritual; but we do not see that this opinion can be supported, when such passages as these occur: "Cleanliness is next to godliness ;" "Know ye not that ye are the temple of the Holy Ghost, and that if ye corrupt your temple, God will corrupt you?" We may ask of science whether there is any reason for abstaining from blood; and the answer science gives is decidedly against such use, as causing a stimulating immoral influence, inciting animal passions and feverish diseases. But if we could not see any reason for obedience to this command, still it is incumbent upon good Christians to obey it, sanctioned as it is by the authority of revelation. The question before the apostles was whether all the law of Moses, properly so called, was obligatory to the Gentile converts or not; and the answer as to what were the necessary burdens applied to all converts. The words of St. James in Acts xxi. 25, are confirmatory of the general application: "As touching the Gentiles, which believe, we have written and concluded that they keep themselves from the things offered to idols, and from blood and from things strangled," &c., all are included and obliged to keep the decree. Now, by evidence from the fathers and other sources, it can be demonstrated that the Holy Church throughout the world did, not only in the first and purest ages, but even till the darker ages of it (the 10th century or later), in general observe and keep this precept of the apostles. The great St. Chrysostom says: "That the decree was not made to gratify or condescend to the weak." They grounded their practice upon the authority of the apostles; it was not made to suit the prejudices of Pythagorean philosophers, as Bishop Taylor seems to intimate, nor out of complaisance to the Jews; but it seemed good to the Holy Ghost to impose this necessary burthen. St. Austin appears to be the first Father who doubted the obligation to abstain from things strangled, or to mention that there was any division of opinion; but whatever he might think, it is certain that the lawfulness even of eating things strangled was, so far from being a prevailing opinion either in the Eastern or Western Church, that a long time after him, in the Trullan Council, not only the eating of blood, but things strangled, is expressly forbidden. The Canon intimates, indeed, that many endeavoured through luxury to evade the law, by artfully dressing meat with the blood thereof, and therefore forbids the eating of blood, either out of or studiously preserved in the flesh in any manner. Agreeable to this, we have the decision of a Pope in the 8th, and of a Council also in the 9th century, even in the Western Church. Rhenanus and Pamelius allow the usage to have continued till the 12th, and there is no counter authority till that of Aquinas in the 13th, who roundly asserts that the decree against blood was only pro tempore, to avoid giving scandal to the Jews. Now, it may be asked, cui bono, why this law? Is it for the purpose It seems strange that a practice established by Divine authority, and enforced by the greatest human-only of trying our faith, or is it to observed before the law, and under the law, and under the gospel, for above a thousand years, in the Western churches, and to this day by the Eastern churches, and by the Jews, should be so generally set aside amongst us! The Church of Rome, amongst other corruptions, introduced this also. Now, supposing that we desired to go back to the law and the testimony, and attend to the decree in faith and practice, there might be some doubt as to the meaning of it. The best method we can take to understand any law is thoroughly to consider the occasion, the words of the law itself, and the subsequent practice of it. Now, in the first place, the occasion of the Council of Apostles wherein this decree was made was to consider how far the law of Moses was obligatory. The law of Moses forbids the eating of blood, which could be poured out upon the ground as water,-in the slaying of the living creature,-that which could be covered with dust. In fact, we must look to the practice of the Jews, who in killing the animal take care that the jugular vein is cut with a sharp knife, and that the animal empty all its veins and arteries by being hung up by the legs. To avoid eating things strangled, or which have died without being blooded, is also a neces sary thing for Christians. The words of the decree are clear, the understanding is clear; the practice is continued to this day by the Jews, and there can be no doubt of its meaning; there can be no doubt also that it is completely set aside in the present practice of killing and eating among Christians, who seldom ask whether rabbits, hares, pheasants, and other game have been killed by snaring, strangling, or other methods, which retain all the blood in their veins. preserve us from moral and intellectual IN giving a phrenological descrip- | Chapel on Sunday, June 11, when, tion of this popular and distinguished according to announcement, Mr. Binminister, our task is comparatively easy. Not that the rev. gentlemen possesses an ordinary character, but that the manifestations are so true to nature, and do thereby confirm the truthfulness of this science. We had the pleasure of attending Weigh House ney was to preach on behalf of the Orphan Working School Institution. The chapel, as usual, was well filled, and both for the preacher and the hearers it was a little too warm. We wondered that some more effectual means of ventilation had not been 113 adopted. Mr. Binney's manner in the pulpit is somewhat peculiar, but not strange. He reads with great clearness of intonation, and most effective emphasis. In supplication he was simple, solemn, confiding, and hopeful, free from cant or any unseemly presumption. The text was taken from the 14th chapter of John and part of the 18th verse: I will not leave you comfortless." Mr. Binney's style of preaching is like his manner, peculiar and striking, but never offensive. He is a great man, and gives utterance to great truths. We now invite the attention of our readers to a phrenological consideration of his character. There is a reason why Mr. Binney can thus speak and act. We have seen and felt the effects, and we shall now endeavour to trace for him to adhere strictly to his subject, and he will not leave it until it is understood. The more difficult it is, the greater and more intense will be the effort to comprehend it; and when this is accomplished, it will be spoken of in such a manner as to make it clear to the most ordinary understanding. This accounts for the short and full-meaning sentences which so often fall from the mouth of the preacher. There is just Self-esteem enough to give dignity of character. Mr. Binney will never be proud, never servile; and though the truth will be asserted, irrespective of consequences, it will always afford him great pleasure to know that he has secured the approving commendation of his hearers and friends. Every person who has studied the localities of the phrenological organs will, on examining Mr. Binney's development, see how large Firmness, Veneration, Hope, Benevolence, Ideality, and Wonder are. Here lies the great secret of that power which the preacher possesses. He is not like the man of whom the inspired writer speaks, who is double-minded and unstable in all his ways, and driven about and tossed. He endeavours to "prove all things, and to hold fast that which is good." This feeling will be combined with great veneration for the truth. His thoughts about God will be deep and absorbing, and his petitions come up out of the depths of a sanctified and sympathising soul. The organs of Sympathy, Hope, and Bene out the cause. You will perceive, by noticing our engraving, what a great preponderance of brain lies above and in front of the ears. Measuring over the head, from ear to ear, and round the head from Concentrativeness to the perceptive organs, it will be found to be far above the average size. Such a development is always indicative of a high moral and truly intellectual character. We were favoured with a side view of the preacher, and therefore had an ample opportunity of seeing to advantage the posterior as well as the coronal development. The Temperament is a combination of about equal proportions of the Sanguine and Nervous. The social organs are strong and active. Combativeness, Adhesiveness, and Philoprogenitiveness in-volence often gild the face with that fuse a strong and healthy feeling through the whole character. Attachment to friends will be very great, and the opposition to what he conceives to be wrong will always be powerful, and sometimes fearful. Concentrativeness is very large. What Mr. Binney says will be well said. It will be natural fascinating smile which might be called the sunshine of the soul. His love of human nature is strong, and he feels deeply on behalf of humanity. He is a quick perceiver of character, and will sometimes judge from intuition more than from report or observation. The reflective organs are large, and |