We've seen this line a couple of times now, using wine for the sake of the stomach and frequent infirmities. Jerome interprets this (1 Tim 5:23) as an exhortation to moderation, using wine only when medically needed. I have to ask - what was water quality like in Jerome's lifetime? Were people still getting these "frequent infirmities" because they weren't adding alcohol to their water as a purifier? Was water quality an issue when Paul was writing?
This all seems unlikely to me. But I'm looking for a solution to understand the way Jerome goes on to quote Romans, when Paul says it's not good to drink wine or eat meat. The whole context of the passage is Paul arguing that it IS ok to drink wine and eat meat (sacrificed to idols, specifically) if the Christian has a clear conscience, since "the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating or drinking this or that." It's only not ok to drink wine and eat meat in the company of Christians who still feel conflicted about it, lest they sin by going against their conscience.
Obviously we can understand why Jerome is against drunkenness. But it seems like he pulls this quote way out of context to make a point. Is it simply to serve his rhetorical argument? It reminds me of the way Seneca can pick up little toys of speech, as it were, to illustrate whatever point he is currently making (traveling, for example, is at one point good for the scholar to get reading done, and at another point bad for the scholar because its bumpiness and dirtiness doesn't allow reading). It is effective, though. In his series of examples of wine being bad I almost forgot about that little story (sarcasm) of Jesus turning water into wine...
No comments:
Post a Comment