The Nicotine Theological Journal is a name that invites either a snicker or a wince. A self-conscious reference to the chief chemical in tobacco surely does not manifest sufficient seriousness about theology — hence the reactions of uncomfortable giggles or tisk-tisks implying we should act our age.
Here a little historical reminder may be in order. The editors grew up in an era of American Protestantism not too distant from the time when Harold John Ockenga, the founding president of Fuller Seminary and the National Association of Evangelicals, was publicly ridiculed for his behavior during a trip in 1947 to Europe. In his new book, The Surprising Work of God, Garth M. Rosell writes:
Throughout the months of autumn, . . . a flurry of letters arrived in Ockenga’s Park Street Church postbox asking if the rumors swirling about him were really true. ‘You are probably aware of the rumors relative to your personal actions while on the European trip this summer,’ wrote one concerned friend. Other letters added the specifics: that Ockenga had insisted on visiting the pope despite the objections of the Protestant clergy in Rome, that he had made ‘obeisance’ to the Pope when the delegation had visited him in the Vatican, that he was seen drinking ‘intoxicating liquor’ at meals and receptions, that he had attended the opera and theater in Paris, and that he had purchased ‘cigarettes in the P.X. and then sold them on the black market.
It turns out that Ockenga had only shaken the Pope’s hand during the visit to the Vatican, sipped champagne at one reception during the trip, and received a pack of cigarettes being given away as part of a promotion — only to re-gift them to another passerby. Ockenga was a clean liver, a proponent of total abstinence, and not a smoker. But even in the world of neo-evangelicalism, which was supposed to be progressive compared to fundamentalism, to drink or smoke was to be guilty of sin.
Today’s young, restless and Reformed have grown up in a much more relaxed context not just about smoking and drinking, but also dancing, the movies, and — not to be missed — the Lord’s Day. In fact, what has happened among conservative Protestants regarding smoking and drinking is not unlike what happened to Roman Catholics after they gave up mandatory fish on Fridays. For Protestants, abstaining from worldly amusements was of a piece of piety with Sabbath observance and when worldly amusements became saintly, so too did Sabbath partial or non-observance. Whatever the parallels, today’s younger Reformed do not generally know a time when smoking and drinking were taboos. (This is not an argument for not smoking and drinking. It is an argument for smoking and drinking while also keeping the Lord’s Day holy.)
At the same time the young, restless, and mosh-pit friendly Reformed have no clue what it was like for Dutch Reformed faculty at Westminster for whom tobacco and alcohol and sanctifying the Lord’s Day were staples of an ordinary life (not to mention the Scottish members for whom a wee dram was routine). Believe it or not, Westminster and the OPC were odd and small in the 1930s and 1940s to a large degree because of the clash of cultures between the legalistic Ockenga and the stogie-toking Ned B. Stonehouse. Yes, amillennialism and presuppositionalism had something to do with evangelicals’ inability to understand Westminster. But if Ockenga could catch the flack he did simply for sipping champagne and handling a pack of cigarettes, the Westminster faculty could be dismissed as unholy – and even un-American – for their barroom forms of refreshment.
The name of this journal honors this older divide between paleo-Calvinists and neo-evangelicals. We value the theological significance of those differences as much as we revel in the recreational forms that make those differences visible – Sabbath, Psalms, and Single-Malt. And those who think our title juvenile should consider the immaturity that has revived and deepened a divide between smokers and non-smokers that is wider today than it was when Ockenga visited Europe.
Old Life 
Not juvenile, just curious is all. May I say Sabbath, Psalms and cinema (I have plenty other alliterative adiaphora as well)?
But coming from a secular rearing, where substance use and worldly amusement weren’t no thang, I must admit I have always found the squabble intriguing. While my sympathies lie squarely with liberty, would you hold it against me to wonder aloud if some of us over here might be exorcising demons by blowing smoke into the faces of our past? Or am I juts, what was it, “light in my loafers”? (If it helps, my initiation was amongst the legalists, so it’s not as if I don’t get trying to make a point. But since my folks had a liquor cabinet and mom was a helluva social smoker, it just isn’t quite as ingrained I suppose.)
And I believe it’s “champagne.”
LikeLike
This is rich from a guy who didn’t even use capital letters a year ago.
Maybe you’ve been reading Christian too long, but I’m not sure what you’re asking or implying. Are you saying people who come from non-Christian homes will miss the point? If so, I think the point is less auto-biographical than historical. American Protestantism was prohibitionist. It has become libertarian. America has become selectively prohibitionist. The fundamentalists won (on smoking).
LikeLike
As a man who indulges in the Nicotine laced weed from time to time, I am sympathetic to the anti-prohibitionist tendencies. However, there are a couple aspects of this line of thinking that has always bothered me. Might smoking, knowing the health issues it fosters, potentially violate the principle of Christian Prudence? Not only is it damaging to health, it causes insurance rates to go up and is increasingly offensive to other people. And shouldn’t the argument that alcohol and tobacco are good gifts from God also apply to things like Marijuana and even Heroin, as long as they are used in moderation?
LikeLike
Foggy: smoking and drinking in moderation do not seem to seem to qualify as unwise (unless you belong to the American Presbyterian Church). I understand that’s debatable, but I’d like to see the same eagerness for physical purity that prohibitionists use against alcohol or tobacco applied to fat, carbs, air quality, pesticides — the list goes on. It has always struck me that prohibitionism is just another way of congratulating oneself on purity while imbibing and inhaling all sorts of impurities.
The difference between alcohol and tobacco and marijuana and heroine — aside from legality — is that social conventions exist that make smoking and drinking genuinely productive of human goods, like conviviality, sociability, celebration, and even reflection. My own understanding of the use of heroine and marijuana is that they tend to be a form of escape. This is not a hard and fast rule, obviously, because people use alcohol to escape and some pot smokers enjoy socializing. But as rewarding as pot may be when smoked in the company of others, it generally does not facilitate lively conversation and intellectual exchange. It does make HoHos, Little Debbies, and Oreos highly desirable, which is undesirable if you’re watching your figure.
LikeLike
So, you are saying that goodness of an item is directly linked to its ability to generate good conversation and intellectual stigmatization? I am sure the Arabs would say that hashish is very good at doing that a lot of music and art (good and not good) has come from those who recreationally used banned substances. I am not making an argument for that Christians should use these drugs. I am merely trying to follow the logical train of thought. After all, alcohol was illegal and many Reformed Protestants were among those who argued for its legalization.
LikeLike
This is less logic and more intuition. It has a lot to do with social conventions. In the West we have a number of practices in which smoking and drinking are part of a wholesome human experience, whether surrounded by talking, eating, or simply enjoying the company of others.
When the Arabs become Reformed I’ll be willing to consider hash.
LikeLike
was it a year ago? time flies. (the content of that form was to convey the breeziness of blogs, but it just ended up irritating folks.).
I get your point and agree. But, auto-biographical or historical, I guess I’m just wondering what the fixation one way or another on substance is exactly? Maybe that’s another conversation. Speaking of intuition, I suppose as something of an outsider to American Christian sub-culture I just find the idea that substance use has any bearing on piety on way or another kinda funny, that’s all.
Foggy,
Prohibitionism is stupid. Heroin and marijuana are illegal. Is there no accounting for lawfulness?
LikeLike
I agree it is stupid. I enjoy a good beer and cigar. I am just wondering whether my principle which makes me against prohibition should also make me for the legalization of other God-given mood altering substances. I want to say no. But I am not sure why. Also, there is the real possibility that smoking tobacco may be illegal and Pot legal in the next 20 years.
As a side note, I do know a small but growing number of Reformed Arabs. I also have friends who are missionaries in Yeman and Jordan. So, it is an issue real Reformed people run into. They have asked me about it, and I am not sure what the proper response should be
LikeLike
Fixation? Hardly. It’s an observation that some of the best theological exchanges and warmest fellowhip has happened with tobacco and alcohol around. Obviously, the couple of times we’ve sipped pints in GR made no impression on you. I’ll live.
LikeLike
I propose we form an Arab Reformed subcommittee and have them report back to the whole on hash. Seriously, I’m not sure we in the West have the cultural outlook to render a proper judgment.
LikeLike
I wondered if the F-word would wrankle you. Ignore it if it doesn’t help. I agree that many of the best exchanges and warmest fellowship happens with substances flowing, theological and otherwise. But also without. Either way, whatever, I don’t mind since it’s the company and subjects that matter most to my mind.
Second on the hash committee. Do we have a motion to vote (lapsed cultural outlook be damned)?
LikeLike
LOL!
LikeLike
I’ll be on the hash committee….woah check out the colours on this blog man.
LikeLike
I need to see your recipe for brownies before backing your candidacy.
LikeLike
LOL!
LikeLike