Wbat is mQnt by FJe!b. What is meant by Flejh. PART VIr. XJireEfionsagainjl tl,e Mafter fin; SENSU .ALITY, FLESHP LE.AS ING r>r V'oluptuotifizefs. · . ~ol· I Shall be the !horter on this alfo, becaufe I have fpoken fo much already in my Trearife of Self-dmyal. Before we come tomore: particular DtreCbons, tt is needfl1l that we d 1 fcern the nature and evtl of the fin which we fpeak againll : I !hall therefore 1. Tell you what is meant by [ Flrjh J here: And 2· What fiejh-pleajing 1t IS that is unlawful, and what fenfoality is. 3· Wherein the Mahgnity of thiS fin confilleth. 4· I fhal! anfwer fome ObJectrons: 5- I fhal! fhew you the Signs of it. 6. The Counterfeits of the contrary: 7· And the falfeSigns, which make fame accufed wrongfully by themfelves or others. 9· 2• I. Becaufe· you may find in Writings between the Protellants and Papills, that its become a Controverfie, whether by [ficfh J in Scripture ( wljere this fin is mentioned ) be meant th<Body it fe!f, or the foul fo far as it is unregentrate, I fhall briefly firll refolve this quellion. When we fpeak _of the unrtgtntratepart, we mean not that the foul hath two parts, whereof one is rrgener.:zte and the other unregeHerate: But as the purblind lye hath both Light and Dark..ntfs in the fame fubject, fo is it with the {oul which is regenerate but in part, that is, in an imperfili degree: And by the JtHrt- . generaupart, ismeantthewhole foul {ofarasitis unttgenerate. Theword [fi.efo] in its prima– ry fignificatio11, is taken for that part of the Body as fuch .without rcfpcCl: to fin : a11d next tor the whole body, asdillinct from the foul. But inrdpeettojin and d"ty, it is taken I. Sometime for the fen(ttive appetit~, not ~ jinfol in it felf, but as defiring that which God hath obliged Reafon to deny it. 2• More frequently for this fenfitive appetite as inordinate, and fo finful in its own defires: 3• Moft frequently for both the inordinate jfnfitive appetite it felf, and the Ration&! powtr$, fo far as they are corrupted by it, and finfully difpofed toobey it, or to fo!low inordinately fenlual things: But then the Name is primari!Ji taken for the fenfual appetite it felf, (as difeafed) and but by pJrtici– pation for the Rational powers. For the underfianding of which, you muft confider, 1· That rhe ap– petite i't felf might innocently ( even in innocency ) defire a forbiddm objeCt: when ic was not the Appetite that was forbidden, but the De{ire of the Will, or the a/1u:Jl takjng ir. ·That a man in a Feavor doth Thir/1 for more than he may lawfully drink, is not of it felf a lin: Bur to Defire it by Pratlical Volition, or toDrink...it is a fin : For it IS tbefe that God forbids ; and ·not the Tbirft which is not in our power to exti11guifh. That Adam had an Appetite to the forbidden fmit was nor his fin: but that his will obeyed his appetite, and his mouth did eat. For the Appetite and fenfirive nature is ofGod, and is in .nature antecedent to the Law: God made us Men, before he gave us Laws : And the Law commandeth us not, to alter our felves from what he made Ui , or any thing elfe which .is natu$1ly out of our power. But it is the fin of the will and executivepower$, to do rhat evil which confifieth in obeying an innocent Appetite : The Appetite is neceffary, and not free; and therefore God doth not direct his commands or prohibitions to it directly, but to the: Rea{on and fret-will. 2· But fince mans fall, theAppttite it felf is corrupted and become inordin.:zte, that is, more impetuous, vio– lent and unruly, than it was in the Hate of lnnocency; by the unhappy difiempers that ha\•e befallen the Body it felf. For we find now by experience, that a man that ufeth himfelf to fweet and whol– fom temperance, hath no fuch impetuous Hrivings of his Appetite.againll his reajo11 (ifhe behealtll[ul) as thofe have that are either difeafed, or zifid to obey their appetites: And ifVJe and He.alth make fo great alteration, we have caufe to think that the DepravatioJt of Nature by the Fall did more~ 3• This inOrdinate appetite isjin, by Participation; fo far as the Appetite may be faid to be Free by ·'P3rticipation, though not in it fclf : Becaufe it is the Appetitt of a Rational free-agent : For though fin be tirfiin the will in its true form, yet it is not the will o1tly that is the fubject of it ( though primarily it be) but the whole man) fa far as his acts are Voluntary: For the wiUhath theCommaHtl of the other faculties: and they are Voluntary aCls which the will either commands, or doth not 1 forbid when it can and ought. To lye is a voluntary fin of the man) and the tongue partaketh of the guilt. The will might have kept our that fin, which caufed a diforder in the appetite. If a Drun~ kard or a Glutton provoke a venereous inordinate appetite in himfelf, that lull is his fin , becauG:: it is volufttarily provoked. 4· Yet fuch additions of inordinacy, as men fiir up in any Appetire, by their own actual fins and culloms, are more aggravated and dangerous to the foul, than chat mea~ fure of difiemper which is meerly the fruit of original Gn• .5· This imrdinatenefs of the !enficive Appetite, with the meer PrivationofRcditude in the Mind andWill, is enough to caufe mans ACtual fin. For if rhc Horf~.:s be headUrong, the meer weaknefs, fleepin~.:Cs, negligence, or abfence of the Coachman is enough ro concur to rhe overthrow of the Coach : So if rhe B ..eaflm and Will had no Pojitioe inclinations to evil or fenfual objects, yet if they have 110t fo much Light and Love to higher thmgs,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=