תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

PART VII.

Directions against the Master Sin: Sensuality, Fleshpleasing, or Voluptuousness.

I SHALL be the shorter on this also, because I have spoken so much already in my "Treatise of Self-denial." Before we come to more particular Directions, it is needful that we discern the nature and evil of the sin which we speak against. I shall therefore, 1. Tell you what is meant by 'flesh' here. And 2. What fleshpleasing it is that is unlawful, and what sensuality is. 3. Wherein the malignity of this sin consisteth. 4. I shall answer some objections. 5. I shall shew you the signs of it. 6. The counterfeits of the contrary. 7. And the false signs, which make some accused wrongfully, by themselves or others.

I. Because you may find in writings between the Protestants and Papists, that it is become a controversy, whether by flesh,' in Scripture, (where this sin is mentioned) be meant the body itself, or the soul so far as it is unregenerate, I shall briefly first resolve this question. When we speak of the unregenerate part, we mean not that the soul hath two parts, whereof one is regenerate, and the other unregenerate but as the purblind eye hath both light and darkness in the same subject, so is it with the soul which is regenerate but in part, that is, in an imperfect degree and by the unregenerate part is meant, the whole soul, so far as it is unregenerate. The word 'flesh' in its primary signification, is taken from that part of the body, as such, without respect to sin and next for the whole body, as distinct from the soul. But in respect to sin and duty, it is taken, 1. Sometimes for the sensitive appetite, not as sinful in itself, but as desiring that, which God hath obliged reason to deny. 2. More frequently, for this sensitive appetite, as inordinate, and so sinful in its own desires. 3. Most frequently, for both the inordinate sensitive appetite itself, and the rational powers, so far as they are corrupted by it, and sinfully disposed to obey it, or to follow, inordinately, sensual things. But then the name is primarily taken for the sensual appetite itself, (as diseased) and but by participation

for the rational powers. For the understanding of which, you must consider, 1. That the appetite itself might innocently (even in innocency) desire a forbidden object: when it was not the appetite that was forbidden, but the desire of the will, or the actual taking it. That a man in a fever doth thirst for more than he may lawfully drink, is not of itself a sin; but to desire it by practical volition, or to drink it, is a sin; for it is these that God forbids, and not the thirst, which it is not in our power to extinguish. That Adam had an appetite to the forbidden fruit was not his sin; but that his will obeyed his appetite, and his mouth did eat. For the appetite and sensitive nature are of God, and are in nature antecedent to the law. God made us men before he gave us laws and the law commandeth us, not to alter ourselves from what he made us, or any thing else which is naturally out of our power. But it is the sin of the will and executive powers, to do that evil which consisteth in obeying an innocent appetite. The appetite is necessary, and not free; and therefore God doth not direct his commands or prohibitions to it directly, but to the reason and free-will. 2. But since man's fall, the appetite itself is corrupted and become inordinate, that is, more impetuous, violent, and unruly than it was in the state of innocency, by the unhappy distempers that have befallen the body itself. For we find now by experience, that a man that useth himself to sweet and wholsome temperance, hath no such impetuous strivings of his appetite against his reason (if he be healthful) as those have that are either diseased, or used to obey their appetites. And if use and health make so great alteration, we have cause to think that the depravation of nature by the fall did more. 3. This inordinate appetite is sin, by participation; so far as the appetite may be said to be free by participation, though not in itself; because it is the appetite of a rational, free agent for though sin be first in the will in its true form, yet it is not the will only that is the subject of it (though primarily it be) but the whole man, so far as his acts are voluntary for the will hath the command of the other faculties; and they are voluntary acts which the will either commands, or doth not forbid when it can and ought. To lie is a voluntary sin of the man, and the tongue partaketh of the guilt. The will might have kept out that sin, which caused

a disorder in the appetite. If a drunkard or a glutton provoke a venereous, inordinate appetite in himself, that lust is his sin, because it is voluntarily provoked. 4. Yet such additions of inordinacy, as men stir up in any appetite, by their own actual sins and customs, are more aggravated and dangerous to the soul, than that measure of distemper which is merely the fruit of original sin. 5. This inordinateness of the sensitive appetite, with the mere privation of rectitude in the mind and will, is enough to cause man's actual sin. For if the horses be headstrong, the mere weakness, sleepiness, negligence, or absence of the coachman is enough to concur to the overthrow of the coach: so if the reason and will had no positive inclinations to evil or sensual objects, yet if they have not so much light and love to higher things as will restrain the sensual appetite, it hath positive inclination enough in itself to forbidden things to ruin the soul by actual sin. 6. Yet (though it be a great controversy among divines) I conceive that in the rational powers themselves, there are positive, habitual, inordinate inclinations to sensual, forbidden things. For as actually it is certain the reason of the proud and covetous do contrive, and oft approve the sin, and the will embrace it; so these are done so constantly in a continued stream of action by the whole man, that it seems apparent that the same faculties which run out in such strong and constant action, are themselves the subjects of much of the inclining, positive habits: and if it be so in additional, acquired sin, it is like it was so in original sin. 7. Though sin be formerly subjected first in the will, yet materially it is first in the sensitive appetite, (at least this sin of fleshpleasing or sensuality is). The flesh or sensitive part is the first desirer, though it be sin no further than it is voluntary. 8. All this set together telleth you further, that the word flesh,' signifieth the sensual inclinations of the whole man; but first and principally, the corrupted sensual appetite; and the mind and will's (whether privative or positive) concurrence, but secondarily, and as falling in with sense. The appetite 1. Preventeth reason. 2. And resisteth reason. 3. And at last corrupteth and enticeth reason and will, to be its servants and purveyors.

And that the name 'flesh' doth primarily signify the sensitive appetite itself, is evident in the very notation of

[blocks in formation]

the name. Why else should the habits or vices of the rational powers be called 'flesh' any more than 'spirit' or any thing else? If it were only in respect of their object, they should be called 'the world' also, because that is their object. It is a certain rule, that 'That faculty is most predominant in man, whose object is made his chiefest end.' Sensitive delights being made the felicity and end of the unsanctified, it followeth that the sensitive faculties are predominant; which being called flesh, (by a nearer trope) the mind from it receives the denomination. The Scriptures also shew this plainly: I remember not any one place in the Old Testament where there is any probability that the word 'flesh' should signify only the rational soul as unrenewed. Matt. xvi. 17. "Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee:" that is, mortal man hath not revealed it. Matt. xxvi. 41. "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak :" that is, your bodies are weak, and resist the willingness of your souls for sinful habits are not here called weak. John iii. 6. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh :" that is, man by natural generation, can beget but natural man, called flesh from the visible part; and not the spiritual life, which nature is now destitute of. Rom. vii. 25. " With my flesh I serve the law of sin:" that is, with my sensitive powers, and my mind so far is captivated thereto. Rom. viii. 1. 5. Flesh and spirit are oft opposed: "They that are of the flesh, mind the things of the flesh, &c. :" that is, they, in whom the sensitive interest and appetite are predominant: for it is called the body here, as well as the flesh, verses 10, 11. 13. The mind is here included; but it is as serving the flesh and its interest, Gal. v. 16, 17. 19. Flesh and spirit are in the same manner opposed. And 2 Pet. ii. 18., the lusts of the flesh are in this sense mentioned. And Ephes. ii. 3. Rom. vii. 18. xiii. 14. 1 Cor. v. 5. 1 Pet. ii. 11., in which there is mention of "fleshly lusts, which fight against the spirit," and "fleshly wisdom, making provision for the flesh, &c. And Col. ii. 18. there is indeed the name of a fleshly mind, which is but a mind deceived and subservient to the flesh; so that the flesh itself, or sensitive interest and appetite are first signified in all or most places, and in some the mind, as subservient thereto.

It is of the greater consequence that this be rightly un

derstood, lest you be tempted to imitate the Libertines, who think the flesh or sensitive part is capable of no moral good or evil, and therefore, all its actions being indifferent, we may be indifferent about them, and look only to the superior powers and others that think that the Scripture by flesh' meaneth only the rational soul as unrenewed, do thereupon cherish the flesh itself, and pamper it, and feed its unruly lusts, and never do any thing to tame the body; but pray daily that God would destroy the flesh within them, that is, their sinful habits of reason and will, while they cherish the cause, or neglect a chief part of the cure. And on the contrary, some Papists that look only at the body as their enemy, are much in fastings, and bodily exercises, while they neglect the mortifying of their carnal minds.

II. How far fleshpleasing is a sin, I shall distinctly open to you in these propositions. 1. The pleasing or displeasing of the sensitive appetite in itself considered, is neither sin nor duty, good or evil; but as commanded or forbidden by some law of God; which is not absolutely done.

2. To please the flesh by things forbidden is undoubtedly a sin, and so it is to displease it too. Therefore this is not all that is here meant, that the matter that pleaseth it must not be things forbidden.

3. To overvalue the pleasing of the flesh is a sin: and to prefer it before the pleasing of God, and the holy preparations for heaven, is the state of carnality and ungodliness, and the common cause of the damnation of souls. The delight of the flesh or senses is a natural good; and the natural desire of it in itself (as is said) is neither vice nor virtue: but when this little natural good is preferred before the greater spiritual, moral, or eternal good, this is the sin of carnal minds, which is threatened with death TM.

4. To buy the pleasing of the flesh at too dear a rate, as the loss of time, or with care and trouble, above its worth, and to be too much set on making provisions to please it, doth shew that it is overvalued, and is the sin forbidden ".

5. When any desire of the flesh is inordinate, immoderate, or irregular for matter, or manner, quantity, quality, or season, it is a sin to please that inordinate desire.

6. When pleasing the flesh doth too much pamper it,

Rom. viii. 1. 5-8. 13.

■ Rom. xiii. 14:

« הקודםהמשך »