A Treatise of Self-Denial, Treatise · Chapter 56 – Chapter 61
CHAP. LVI. Q. Or Relieving Strangers before Kindred?
Queſt 6. WHether ſelf-denial require that we ſhould relieve godly ſtrangers, before our natural Kindred, eſpecially that are ungodly? Or that we love them better?
Anſw. 1. Where our Natural Kindred are as holy and as needy as others, there is a double obligation on us, both natural and ſpiritual, to love and relieve them. 2. Where they are as Holy as others, but leſs needy, there may lie a double obligation on us, to love them, and yet not to give to them. 3. If they be more needy, or as needy as others, though withal they be ungodly, we are not thereby excuſed from natural affections or charitable relief. 4. We muſt diſtinguiſh between children, or ſuch kindred as nature caſteth upon our care for proviſion, and ſuch kindred as are by nature caſt upon others. If parents were not obliged to relieve and provide for their own children, they would be expoſed to miſery, and man ſhould be more unnatural than brutes. So that even when by ungodlineſs, they are leſs amiable than others, yet God hath bound men to provide for them more. 5. Natural love and ſpiritual are much different; you may have a ſtronger Natural Love to an ungodly child, than to a Godly ſtranger, but you muſt have a ſpiritual Love to that Godly ſtranger, more than to your child; And that ſpiritual Love muſt be (at leaſt as to the Rational and Eſtimative part) much greater than the other Natural Love: And yet you may be bound to Give more, where you are not bound to Love more. For it is not Love only that is the cauſe of giving; but we are Gods Stewards, and muſt diſpoſe of what we have as he preſcribeth us: and his ſtanding Law of Nature for the preſervation of mankind, is, that parents take care of their children, as ſuch.
6. The will and ſervice of God, being it that ſhould diſpoſe of all that we have, we muſt in all ſuch doubts look to theſe two things for our direction: Firſt to the particular Precepts of the Word: and there we find the fore-ſaid duty of parents expreſſed, and withal the duty of relieving all that are needy to our power: Secondly to the General Precept: and there we find, that we muſt honour God with our ſubſtance, and lay out all our talents to his ſervice. And ſo the duty lieth plain before us. If you have a child that is wicked, yet as prents provide him his daily bread; and leave him enough for daily bread when you die. But more he ſhould not have from me: but the reſt (had I ten thouſand pound a year) I would lay out that way that my conſcience told me may be moſt ſerviceable to God. For 1. I am not bound to ſtrengthen an enemy of Chriſt, and enable him to do the greater miſchief. 2. Nor to caſt away the mercies of God. 3. If the Law required the parents to cauſe ſuch a Rebellious ſon to be put to death, Deut. 21. 18. then ſurely to provide him daily bread, is now as much as a parent is obliged to. And if it be an expreſs Command, that he that will not labour ſhall not eat, 2 Theſ. 3. 10. ſuch uſeleſs members forſeiting their very ſuſtenance, then ſurely he that is ſuch or worſe, ſpeeds fair if you leave him food and raiment. 4. And the great command of doing all to Gods Glory, and ſerving him with our ſubſtance, will not be obeyed, if you leave your Riches and Eſtates in the hands of ſuch perſons meerly becauſe they are your Children. No doubt but that is a ſelfiſh and unconſcionable courſe, and the thing that ſets up the ungodly to diſturb the Church, & Lord it over the world, while parents furniſh them with Riches to do the Devil eminent ſervice with.
Object. But who knows but God may convert them? Anſw. You cannot guide your actions by things unknown. You have no promiſe of their converſion; nor much probability, when they have fruſtrated all your Counſels and means of their good education; and grace is ſupernatural: and therefore you muſt proceed upon grounds that are known.
And for remoter Kindred, if they may be as ſerviceable to God with what I give them as others, nature teacheth me to prefer them before others: but otherwiſe Grace teacheth me, both to love a godly ſtranger better than ungodly kindred, and to lay out all that I have as may be moſt ſerviceable to God.
CHAP. LVII. Q. How we muſt love our Neighbours as our ſelves.
Queſt. 7. HOw is it that Self-denial requireth us to love our neighbour as our ſelves: Is it with the ſame degree of Love?
Anſw. I anſwered this on the by, before: Briefly, 1. The chief part of the precept is Negative: thus q. d. [Set not up thy ſelf againſt the welfare of thy neighbour: Draw not from him, or covet not that which is his to thy ſelf, and confine not thy love and care of thyſelf] 2. And it comprehendeth this poſitive, and that as to the kind of Love, we ſhould love both our ſelves and neighbours as means to God, and for the intereſt of God; and in that reſpect there is an equality: we muſt appretiative or eſtimatively love a better and more ſerviceable man that hath more of Gods Spirit in him, above our ſelves: and an equal perſon equally with our ſelves, with this Rational Love, which intendeth all for God. 3. But Natural Love which is put into a man for ſelf-preſervation will be ſtronger to ſelf than to another, and alloweth us caeteris paribus to prefer, and firſt preſerve and provide for our ſelves. And in this regard, our neighbour muſt be loved but as a ſecond ſelf, or next our ſelves. 4. But this Natural Love in the exerciſe of it, at leaſt in imperate acts, is to be ſubſervient to our Rational ſpiritual Love, and to be over-maſtered by it. And therefore it is that as Reaſon teacheth an Heathen to prefer his Country before his life, (though the inſtinct of Nature incline us more to life) ſo faith teacheth a Chriſtian much more, to prefer Gods honour, and the Goſpel, Church, Common-wealth, and his neighbours good when it more conduceth to theſe ends, than his own, before himſelf, his liberty or life.
CHAP. LVIII. Q. Is Self-revenge and Penance ſelf-denial?
Queſt. 8. WHether ſelf-denial require us after ſin, to uſe vindictive penance or puniſhment of the fleſh, by faſting, watching, going barefoot, lying hard, wearing hair-cloth, or to do this ordinarily? as ſome of the Papiſts, Monks, and Fryars do?
Anſw. The eaſineſs of this caſe may allow a brief deciſion. 1. The Body muſt be ſo far afflicted, as is needful to humble it, and ſubdue it to the ſpirit, and tame its Rebellion, and fit it for the ſervice of God. 2. The exerciſe of a holy revenge on our ſelves may be a lower end, ſubservient to this. 3. It muſt alſo be ſo far humbled as is neceſſary to expreſs Repentance to the Church when Abſolution is expected upon publick Repentance. 4. As alſo to concur with the ſoul in ſecret or open humiliation.
But 1. He that ſhall think that whippings, or ſackcloth, or going bare-foot or other ſelf-puniſhing, are of themſelves good works, and meritorious with God, or ſatisfie his Juſtice, or are a ſtate of perfection, doth offer God a hainous ſin, under the name and conceit of a good work. 2. And he that ſhall by ſuch ſelf-afflicting unfit his Body for the ſervice of God, yea that doth not cheriſh it ſo far as is neceſſary to fit it for duty, is guilty of ſelf-murder, and defrauding God of his ſervice, and abuſing his creature, and depriving others of the help we owe them: ſo that i… one word, the Body muſt be ſo uſed as may beſt fit it for Gods ſervice. And to think that ſelf-afflicting is a good work, meerly as it is penalty or ſuffering to the body, or that we may go further herein, is to think 1. That we ſhould uſe our Body worſe than our beaſt; for we will no further afflict him than is neceſſary to tame him, or ſerve our ſelves by him, and not to diſable him for ſervice. 2. And it will teach men to kill themſelves: for that is a greater penalty to the body than whipping or faſting. 3. And it is an offering God a ſacrifice of cruelty and Robbery, which we commit againſt himſelf and man.
But I muſt needs add, that though ſome Fryars and Melancholy people are apt to go too far in this, and pine their bodies or miſuſe them with conceits of merit and ſatisfaction; yet almoſt all the common people run into the contrary extream, and pamper and pleaſe their fleſh, to the diſpleaſing of God, and the ruine of their ſouls. And I know but few that have need to be reſtrained from afflicting or taking down the fleſh too much.
CHAP. LIX. Q. Is ſelf-denial to be without Paſſion?
Queſt. 9. WHether ſelf-denial conſiſt in the laying by of all Paſſions, and bringing the ſoul to an impaſsionate ſerenity?
Anſw. The Stoicks and ſome Behmeniſts think ſo: But ſo doth not God or any well informed man. For 1. God would not have made the Affections in vain: It is not the Paſſions, but the diſorder of them that is ſinful, or the fruit of ſin. 2. We are commanded to exerciſe all the Affections or Paſſions for God, and on other ſutable objects. We muſt Love God with all the heart, and ſoul, and might, which is not without affection, or paſſion. We muſt Love his ſervants, his Church, his Word, his wayes: We muſt fear him above them that can kill us: we muſt hunger and thirſt after his Righteouſneſs, and pant after him as the Hart doth after the Water-brooks: We muſt be angry and ſin not. A zeal for God is the life of our Graces: we must always be zealous in a good matter; fervent in Spirit, ſerving the Lord. We muſt hate evil, and ſorrow for it, when we are guilty, and grieve under the ſenſe of our miſcarriages, and Gods diſpleaſure. And all theſe (expreſly commanded in the Word) are holy Affections or Paſsions of the ſoul.
3. Yea it is the Work of the Holy Ghoſt to ſanctifie all theſe Paſſions that they may be uſed for God; and they are called by the names of the ſeveral graces of the Spirit. And it is not Paſsion, but diſordered Paſſion that muſt be denied.
CHAP. LX. How far muſt we deny our own Reaſon?
Queſt. 10. HOw far muſt we deny our own Reaſon? Anſw. 1. We muſt not be unreaſonable, nor live unreaſonably, nor believe unreaſonably, nor love, or chooſe, or let out any affection unreaſonably. We are commanded to be ready to give a reaſon of our hopes. It is our Rational faculty that proveth us men, and is eſſential to us: And without it we can neither underſtand the things of God or man: For how ſhould we underſtand without an underſtanding?
But yet Reaſon muſt thus far be denied. 1. We muſt not think highlier of our Reaſon than it deſerves either in it ſelf, or as compared to others. 2. We muſt not ſatisfie its curioſity in prying into unrevealed things. 3. Nor muſt we ſatisfie or ſuffer its preſumption in judging our Brethren, or cenſuring mens hearts or ways uncharitably. 4. Nor muſt we endure it to riſe up againſt the Word or ways of God, or contradict or quarrel with Divine Revelations, though we cannot ſee the particular Evidence or Reaſon of each Truth, nor reconcile them together in our apprehenſions. Though we may not take any thing to be the Word of God without Reaſon; yet when he have Reaſon to it take to be his Word, we muſt believe and ſubmit to all that is in it, without any more Reſon for our belief. For the formal Reaſon of our belief, is, becauſe God is true that did reveal this Word: And we have the greateſt Reaſon in the world to believe all that he revealeth.
CHAP. LXI. Q. Muſt we be content with affiictions, permitted ſin, &c.
Queſt. 11. IF Self-denial require us to Content our ſouls in the Will of God, then whether muſt we be content with his afflictions, or permiſsion of ſin, or the Churches ſufferings; and 1. How will this ſtand with our due ſenſe of Gods diſplcaſure and chaſtiſements. 2. And with our praying againſt them. 3. And our uſe of means for their removal?
Anſw. 1. The Will of God is one thing, and the Hurt which he willeth us is another: and the Good En for which he willeth it, is a third. The afflicting Will of God is good, and muſt be Loved as good: and the End and Benefit of Chaſtiſement is good and muſt be loved: But the hurt as hurt muſt not be loved. It is not Gods Will that we muſt reſiſt, or ſeek to change; nor yet is it the End or Benefit of the Chaſtiſement; but only the hurt, which our folly hath made a ſutable means. And we may not ſeek to remove this hurt, till the effect be procured, or on terms that may conſiſt with the End of it. And this is not againſt the Will of God, that when the good is attained, the Affliction be removed.
2. And you muſt diſtinguiſh between his Pleaſed, and Diſpleaſed Will! his complacency and acceptance, and his Diſplacency and Rejecting Will. Every act of Gods Will muſt be approved and loved as Good in God; but it is not every one that we may Reſt and Rejoyce in as Good to us, and as our felicity. We muſt be grieved for Gods Diſpleaſure, and yet Love even that holy will that is diſpleaſed with us; and we muſt be ſenſible of Gods judgments, and yet Love the Will that doth inflict them. But it is only the Love of God and Pleaſure of his Will to us, that can be the Reſt and felicity of our ſouls.
3. Some acts of Gods Will are about the Means, and have a tendency to a further end; and ſome are about the End it ſelf. His Commanding Will we muſt Love and obey: his forbidding Will muſt have the ſame affections: his threatning Will we muſt love and fear; his Rewarding Will we muſt Love and Rejoyce in: His full Accepting Will, that is, his Love and Complacency in us, we muſt Reſt and Delight our ſouls in for ever. And thus we muſt comply with the Will of God.