There is another group of principles that, for several reasons, can be placed under the broad heading of Desires, though they are clearly different in some ways from that form of desire known as the appetites.These principles, which are called the Propensities or Propensive principles in order to distinguish them from the appetites, seem to depend less on the condition of the physical body for their existence and activity than the appetites do. These are what we commonly call
inclinations. Since they are, to some extent, removed from the outward senses, which form the basis for the action of the appetites, they plainly stand closer to the higher and more important principles of our nature. For that reason, in the usual way we judge the different parts of our mental constitution, they are seen as holding a higher rank. Some of the principles that belong under this general heading — for it is not necessary to list them all, and even less necessary to examine them one by one — are the principle of self-preservation, or the desire for continued existence; curiosity, or the desire for knowledge; sociality, or the desire for society; self-love, or the desire for happiness; the desire for esteem; and several others.
Spirituality can never truly be said to have taken up residence in the heart, or to have become a lasting and supreme part of our inward life, unless it reaches these inclinations, checks their excessive tendencies, and brings them back to their original measure: a subordinate and holy action. It is certainly not too much to say that we are accountable to God — strictly and fully accountable — for the exercise of our social feelings, for the exercise of curiosity, or the desire for knowledge, and for the exercise of the other inclinations, just as we are accountable for indulging the appetites or for any other inward attitude or tendency of which we are capable. And so it cannot rightly be said, in the full sense of the words, that we live in Christ, or that "Christ lives in us," while any of these principles still hold an unsanctified influence. They do not need to be destroyed; but clearly, they must be made holy.
These views, it will be seen, do not fully agree with opinions that have sometimes been held by individuals, and even by large groups of Christians. Many devout people, at different periods in church history, have argued that the various propensities and affections should not merely be crucified in the true scriptural sense — that is, reduced from irregular action to subordinate and holy action — but should be exterminated. In line with this opinion, mistaken as it clearly is, many people of both sexes, including some known for their learning and social rank, have made it a settled rule to avoid everything that could please the appetites or satisfy the needs of our social nature. Led by mistaken ideas of what Christianity really requires, they have literally made their homes in the dens and caves of the earth, and it may be said, with too much truth, that they rejected human society for the company of wild beasts. Church history contains many examples of this kind, from the days of the anchorets, who weakened their bodies and offered their solitary prayers in the deserts of Egypt, down to the present time. It is related, for example, of Catherine of Cardonne, a devout Spanish lady of the 16th century, who moved in the highest ranks of society and was well endowed with intellect and education, that she withdrew to a lonely cavern in a remote mountain region and spent many years in the strictest seclusion, with no adequate clothing and no food except what the uncultivated earth provided. No one can read the story of the extreme privations she imposed on herself, for the purpose of closer communion with God, without feeling both regret for the errors of her judgment and deep respect for the self-sacrificing piety of her heart. There have been many cases of this kind.
Many of the people we are referring to here placed more confidence in
works than in
faith. This was a serious error, though a fair consideration of their lives will probably lead us to regard it as an unintentional one. The powerful role of faith in renewing the human mind does not seem to have been well understood by them. And because they were left, to a considerable degree, without the help and comfort that flow so richly from that source, they pushed the principle of consecration — which, apart from faith, becomes the incomplete and unsatisfying principle of mere works — to its extreme limits. They deprived themselves of necessary sleep; wore garments that caused constant suffering; mixed ashes with their bread; and submitted to other penitential acts and observances, either to make themselves, in their present state, more acceptable to God or to obtain divine mercy for past sins.
With full sympathy for the sincerity that marked the conduct of many humble and suffering recluses, we still feel bound to say that we do not understand the Scriptures as requiring the crucifixion of the appetites and natural human inclinations to be carried this far.
The Scriptures require us to become Christians; they do not require us to stop being human. They require us to put off the "old man," which is false, a perversion of good, and a "liar from the beginning;" but they do not, and could not, require us to put off the "new man," which is the same—if not physically and intellectually, then in all the qualities of the heart — as the original or holy man, the man as he existed in Adam before the fall, and as he became re-existent in the sinless Savior. But Christ, who is set before us as our example, ate and drank without sin; he recognized and fulfilled the duty of social intercourse without sin; and he carried out the various other duties proper to human nature with the same freedom from anything wrong or unholy.
And we may add one remark here, which may help ease some minds on this subject: it is harder, and requires more reflection and more spiritual principle, to regulate the appetites and inclinations than it does to destroy them. And while the work of holy regulation should be regarded as more difficult than the work of destruction, we may also add that it is undoubtedly more acceptable to God, though it is probably less likely to attract attention or gain fame. God expects us to do what he requires us to do; and to attempt to do more, or to do otherwise than He requires, can only come from mistaken judgment or from perverse intentions.
This is a revision of Part 2, Chapter 4 of Thomas C. Upham's book The Interior or Hidden Life (2nd edition 1844), written with the assistance of Microslop CoPilot. The original chapter can be found here: On the nature and regulation of the Propensive Principles.
No comments:
Post a Comment