But on the third interrogation the Lord Himself no longer says, Have you a regard diligis for me, but Do you love amas me? And then the evangelist adds, Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, Do you love amas me? Peter, too, throughout used one word for the one thing, and the third time also replied, Lord, You know all things, You know that I love amo You. I have judged it right to mention this, because some are of opinion that charity or regard dilectio is one thing, love amor another. They say that dilectio is used of a good affection, amor of an evil love.
But it is very certain that even secular literature knows no such distinction. However, it is for the philosophers to determine whether and how they differ, though their own writings sufficiently testify that they make great account of love amor placed on good objects, and even on God Himself. But we wished to show that the Scriptures of our religion, whose authority we prefer to all writings whatsoever, make no distinction between amor , dilectio , and caritas ; and we have already shown that amor is used in a good connection.
And if any one fancy that amor is no doubt used both of good and bad loves, but that dilectio is reserved for the good only, let him remember what the psalm says, He that loves diligit iniquity hates his own soul ; and the words of the Apostle John, If any man love diligere the world, the love dilectio of the Father is not in him.
And if any one demands an instance of amor being used in a bad sense for we have already shown its use in a good sense , let him read the words, For men shall be lovers amantes of their own selves, lovers amatores of money. The right will is, therefore, well-directed love , and the wrong will is ill-directed love.
Love, then, yearning to have what is loved, is desire; and having and enjoying it, is joy ; fleeing what is opposed to it, it is fear ; and feeling what is opposed to it, when it has befallen it, it is sadness. Now these motions are evil if the love is evil ; good if the love is good. What we assert let us prove from Scripture. The apostle desires to depart, and to be with Christ. And, The desire of wisdom brings to a kingdom.
But joy is used in a good sense: Be glad in the Lord , and rejoice , you righteous. And, You have put gladness in my heart. And, You will fill me with joy with Your countenance. Fear is used in a good sense by the apostle when he says, Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.
Will, they say, seeks the good , for this the wise man does. Contentment has its object in good that is possessed, and this the wise man continually possesses. Caution avoids evil , and this the wise man ought to avoid. But sorrow arises from evil that has already happened; and as they suppose that no evil can happen to the wise man, there can be no representative of sorrow in his mind. According to them, therefore, none but the wise man wills, is contented, uses caution; and that the fool can do no more than desire, rejoice , fear , be sad.
I found also that verse in the Gospel : Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them? Indeed, some interpreters have added good things, to make the expression more in conformity with customary usage, and have given this meaning, Whatsoever good deeds that you would that men should do unto you. For they thought that this would prevent any one from wishing other men to provide him with unseemly, not to say shameful gratifications — luxurious banquets, for example — on the supposition that if he returned the like to them he would be fulfilling this precept.
In the Greek Gospel , however, from which the Latin is translated, good does not occur, but only, All things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them, and, as I believe , because good is already included in the word would; for He does not say desire. Yet though we may sometimes avail ourselves of these precise proprieties of language, we are not to be always bridled by them; and when we read those writers against whose authority it is unlawful to reclaim, we must accept the meanings above mentioned in passages where a right sense can be educed by no other interpretation, as in those instances we adduced partly from the prophet , partly from the Gospel.
For who does not know that the wicked exult with joy? Yet there is no contentment for the wicked , says the Lord. And how so, unless because contentment, when the word is used in its proper and distinctive significance, means something different from joy? In like manner, who would deny that it were wrong to enjoin upon men that whatever they desire others to do to them they should themselves do to others, lest they should mutually please one another by shameful and illicit pleasure? And yet the precept, Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them, is very wholesome and just.
And how is this, unless because the will is in this place used strictly, and signifies that will which cannot have evil for its object? And why should the apostle have mentioned it among the praises of charity as a great thing, that it rejoices not in iniquity, unless because wickedness does so rejoice? For even with secular writers these words are used indifferently. For Cicero, that most fertile of orators, says, I desire, conscript fathers, to be merciful. And who would be so pedantic as to say that he should have said I will rather than I desire, because the word is used in a good connection?
Again, in Terence, the profligate youth, burning with wild lust , says, I will nothing else than Philumena. That this will was lust is sufficiently indicated by the answer of his old servant which is there introduced: How much better were it to try and banish that love from your heart, than to speak so as uselessly to inflame your passion still more! And that contentment was used by secular writers in a bad sense that verse of Virgil testifies, in which he most succinctly comprehends these four perturbations —.
The same author had also used the expression, the evil contentments of the mind. So that good and bad men alike will, are cautious, and contented; or, to say the same thing in other words, good and bad men alike desire, fear , rejoice , but the former in a good, the latter in a bad fashion, according as the will is right or wrong. Sorrow itself, too, which the Stoics would not allow to be represented in the mind of the wise man, is used in a good sense, and especially in our writings.
For the apostle praises the Corinthians because they had a godly sorrow. But possibly some one may say that the apostle congratulated them because they were penitently sorry, and that such sorrow can exist only in those who have sinned. For these are his words: For I perceive that the same epistle has made you sorry, though it were but for a season. Now I rejoice , not that you were made sorry, but that you sorrowed to repentance; for you were made sorry after a godly manner, that you might receive damage by us in nothing.
For godly sorrow works repentance to salvation not to be repented of, but the sorrow of the world works death. For, behold, this selfsame thing that you sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you! For they say that Alcibiades if my memory does not deceive me , who believed himself happy , shed tears when Socrates argued with him, and demonstrated that he was miserable because he was foolish. In his case, therefore, folly was the cause of this useful and desirable sorrow, wherewith a man mourns that he is what he ought not to be.
But the Stoics maintain not that the fool, but that the wise man, cannot be sorrowful. But so far as regards this question of mental perturbations, we have answered these philosophers in the ninth book of this work, showing that it is rather a verbal than a real dispute, and that they seek contention rather than truth.
Among ourselves, according to the sacred Scriptures and sound doctrine, the citizens of the holy city of God , who live according to God in the pilgrimage of this life, both fear and desire, and grieve and rejoice. And because their love is rightly placed, all these affections of theirs are right. They fear to sin , because they hear that because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. They fear to be tempted, because they hear the injunction, If a man be overtaken in a fault, you which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering yourself, lest you also be tempted.
And not only on their own account do they experience these emotions, but also on account of those whose deliverance they desire and whose perdition they fear , and whose loss or salvation affects them with grief or with joy. If these emotions and affections, arising as they do from the love of what is good and from a holy charity, are to be called vices , then let us allow these emotions which are truly vices to pass under the name of virtues.
But since these affections, when they are exercised in a becoming way, follow the guidance of right reason, who will dare to say that they are diseases or vicious passions? Wherefore even the Lord Himself, when He condescended to lead a human life in the form of a slave, had no sin whatever, and yet exercised these emotions where He judged they should be exercised. For as there was in Him a true human body and a true human soul , so was there also a true human emotion. But as He became man when it pleased Him, so, in the grace of His definite purpose, when it pleased Him He experienced those emotions in His human soul.
But we must further make the admission, that even when these affections are well regulated, and according to God's will , they are peculiar to this life, not to that future life we look for, and that often we yield to them against our will. And thus sometimes we weep in spite of ourselves, being carried beyond ourselves, not indeed by culpable desire; but by praiseworthy charity.
In us, therefore, these affections arise from human infirmity; but it was not so with the Lord Jesus , for even His infirmity was the consequence of His power. But so long as we wear the infirmity of this life, we are rather worse men than better if we have none of these emotions at all. For the apostle vituperated and abominated some who, as he said, were without natural affection. For to be quite free from pain while we are in this place of misery is only purchased, as one of this world's literati perceived and remarked, at the price of blunted sensibilities both of mind and body.
For the words of the apostle are the confession, not of the common herd, but of the eminently pious , just, and holy men: If we say we have no sin , we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. At present it is enough if we live without crime; and he who thinks he lives without sin puts aside not sin , but pardon. And if that is to be called apathy, where the mind is the subject of no emotion, then who would not consider this insensibility to be worse than all vices?
It may, indeed, reasonably be maintained that the perfect blessedness we hope for shall be free from all sting of fear or sadness; but who that is not quite lost to truth would say that neither love nor joy shall be experienced there? But if by apathy a condition be meant in which no fear terrifies nor any pain annoys, we must in this life renounce such a state if we would live according to God's will , but may hope to enjoy it in that blessedness which is promised as our eternal condition. For that fear of which the Apostle John says, There is no fear in love ; but perfect love casts out fear , because fear has torment.
But the fear which is not in love is of that kind of which Paul himself says, For you have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear. For where the love of acquired good is unchangeable, there certainly the fear that avoids evil is, if I may say so, free from anxiety. For under the name of clean fear David signifies that will by which we shall necessarily shrink from sin , and guard against it, not with the anxiety of weakness, which fears that we may strongly sin , but with the tranquillity of perfect love.
Or if no kind of fear at all shall exist in that most imperturbable security of perpetual and blissful delights, then the expression, The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever, must be taken in the same sense as that other, The patience of the poor shall not perish forever. For patience, which is necessary only where ills are to be borne, shall not be eternal , but that which patience leads us to will be eternal.
So perhaps this clean fear is said to endure for ever, because that to which fear leads shall endure. And since this is so — since we must live a good life in order to attain to a blessed life, a good life has all these affections right, a bad life has them wrong. But in the blessed life eternal there will be love and joy , not only right, but also assured; but fear and grief there will be none.
Whence it already appears in some sort what manner of persons the citizens of the city of God must be in this their pilgrimage, who live after the spirit, not after the flesh — that is to say, according to God , not according to man — and what manner of persons they shall be also in that immortality whither they are journeying. And the city or society of the wicked , who live not according to God , but according to man , and who accept the doctrines of men or devils in the worship of a false and contempt of the true divinity, is shaken with those wicked emotions as by diseases and disturbances.
And if there be some of its citizens who seem to restrain and, as it were, temper those passions , they are so elated with ungodly pride , that their disease is as much greater as their pain is less. And if some, with a vanity monstrous in proportion to its rarity, have become enamored of themselves because they can be stimulated and excited by no emotion, moved or bent by no affection, such persons rather lose all humanity than obtain true tranquillity.
For a thing is not necessarily right because it is inflexible, nor healthy because it is insensible. But it is a fair question, whether our first parent or first parents for there was a marriage of two , before they sinned , experienced in their animal body such emotions as we shall not experience in the spiritual body when sin has been purged and finally abolished. For if they did, then how were they blessed in that boasted place of bliss, Paradise? For who that is affected by fear or grief can be called absolutely blessed? And what could those persons fear or suffer in such affluence of blessings, where neither death nor ill-health was feared, and where nothing was wanting which a good will could desire, and nothing present which could interrupt man's mental or bodily enjoyment?
Their love to God was unclouded, and their mutual affection was that of faithful and sincere marriage; and from this love flowed a wonderful delight, because they always enjoyed what was loved. Their avoidance of sin was tranquil; and, so long as it was maintained, no other ill at all could invade them and bring sorrow. Or did they perhaps desire to touch and eat the forbidden fruit, yet feared to die; and thus both fear and desire already, even in that blissful place, preyed upon those first of mankind? Away with the thought that such could be the case where there was no sin!
And, indeed, this is already sin , to desire those things which the law of God forbids, and to abstain from them through fear of punishment, not through love of righteousness. Away, I say, with the thought, that before there was any sin , there should already have been committed regarding that fruit the very sin which our Lord warns us against regarding a woman : Whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her, has committed adultery with her already in his heart. But because God foresaw all things, and was therefore not ignorant that man also would fall, we ought to consider this holy city in connection with what God foresaw and ordained, and not according to our own ideas, which do not embrace God's ordination.
For man, by his sin , could not disturb the divine counsel, nor compel God to change what He had decreed; for God's foreknowledge had anticipated both — that is to say, both how evil the man whom He had created good should become, and what good He Himself should even thus derive from him.
For though God is said to change His determinations so that in a tropical sense the Holy Scripture says even that God repented , this is said with reference to man's expectation, or the order of natural causes, and not with reference to that which the Almighty had foreknown that He would do. For if he had not had a good will, he could not have been upright. The good will, then, is the work of God ; for God created him with it.
But the first evil will, which preceded all man's evil acts, was rather a kind of falling away from the work of God to its own works than any positive work. And therefore the acts resulting were evil , not having God , but the will itself for their end; so that the will or the man himself, so far as his will is bad, was as it were the evil tree bringing forth evil fruit.
Moreover, the bad will, though it be not in harmony with, but opposed to nature, inasmuch as it is a vice or blemish, yet it is true of it as of all vice , that it cannot exist except in a nature, and only in a nature created out of nothing, and not in that which the Creator has begotten of Himself, as He begot the Word, by whom all things were made. For though God formed man of the dust of the earth, yet the earth itself, and every earthly material, is absolutely created out of nothing; and man's soul , too, God created out of nothing, and joined to the body, when He made man.
But evils are so thoroughly overcome by good, that though they are permitted to exist, for the sake of demonstrating how the most righteous foresight of God can make a good use even of them, yet good can exist without evil , as in the true and supreme God Himself, and as in every invisible and visible celestial creature that exists above this murky atmosphere; but evil cannot exist without good, because the natures in which evil exists, in so far as they are natures, are good.
And evil is removed, not by removing any nature, or part of a nature, which had been introduced by the evil , but by healing and correcting that which had been vitiated and depraved. The will, therefore, is then truly free, when it is not the slave of vices and sins. Such was it given us by God ; and this being lost by its own fault, can only be restored by Him who was able at first to give it.
For He is our Liberator, inasmuch as He is our Saviour. Man then lived with God for his rule in a paradise at once physical and spiritual. For neither was it a paradise only physical for the advantage of the body, and not also spiritual for the advantage of the mind; nor was it only spiritual to afford enjoyment to man by his internal sensations, and not also physical to afford him enjoyment through his external senses.
But obviously it was both for both ends. But after that proud and therefore envious angel of whose fall I have said as much as I was able in the eleventh and twelfth books of this work, as well as that of his fellows, who, from being God's angels , became his angels , preferring to rule with a kind of pomp of empire rather than to be another's subject, fell from the spiritual Paradise, and essaying to insinuate his persuasive guile into the mind of man , whose unfallen condition provoked him to envy now that himself was fallen, he chose the serpent as his mouthpiece in that bodily Paradise in which it and all the other earthly animals were living with those two human beings, the man and his wife, subject to them, and harmless; and he chose the serpent because, being slippery, and moving in tortuous windings, it was suitable for his purpose.
And this animal being subdued to his wicked ends by the presence and superior force of his angelic nature, he abused as his instrument, and first tried his deceit upon the woman , making his assault upon the weaker part of that human alliance, that he might gradually gain the whole, and not supposing that the man would readily give ear to him, or be deceived, but that he might yield to the error of the woman. For as Aaron was not induced to agree with the people when they blindly wished him to make an idol, and yet yielded to constraint; and as it is not credible that Solomon was so blind as to suppose that idols should be worshipped, but was drawn over to such sacrilege by the blandishments of women ; so we cannot believe that Adam was deceived, and supposed the devil's word to be truth , and therefore transgressed God's law, but that he by the drawings of kindred yielded to the woman , the husband to the wife, the one human being to the only other human being.
He was not on this account less culpable, but sinned with his eyes open. And so the apostle does not say, He did not sin , but He was not deceived. But he meant that those are deceived who do not judge that which they do to be sin ; but he knew. Otherwise how were it true Adam was not deceived? But having as yet no experience of the divine severity, he was possibly deceived in so far as he thought his sin venial.
And consequently he was not deceived as the woman was deceived, but he was deceived as to the judgment which would be passed on his apology: The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me, and I did eat. Although they were not both deceived by credulity, yet both were entangled in the snares of the devil , and taken by sin.
If any one finds a difficulty in understanding why other sins do not alter human nature as it was altered by the transgression of those first human beings, so that on account of it this nature is subject to the great corruption we feel and see, and to death, and is distracted and tossed with so many furious and contending emotions, and is certainly far different from what it was before sin , even though it were then lodged in an animal body — if, I say, any one is moved by this, he ought not to think that that sin was a small and light one because it was committed about food, and that not bad nor noxious, except because it was forbidden; for in that spot of singular felicity God could not have created and planted any evil thing.
But by the precept He gave, God commended obedience , which is, in a sort, the mother and guardian of all the virtues in the reasonable creature, which was so created that submission is advantageous to it, while the fulfillment of its own will in preference to the Creator's is destruction. And as this commandment enjoining abstinence from one kind of food in the midst of great abundance of other kinds was so easy to keep — so light a burden to the memory, — and, above all, found no resistance to its observance in lust , which only afterwards sprung up as the penal consequence of sin , the iniquity of violating it was all the greater in proportion to the ease with which it might have been kept.
Our first parents fell into open disobedience because already they were secretly corrupted; for the evil act had never been done had not an evil will preceded it. And what is the origin of our evil will but pride? For pride is the beginning of sin. And this is undue exaltation, when the soul abandons Him to whom it ought to cleave as its end, and becomes a kind of end to itself. This happens when it becomes its own satisfaction. And it does so when it falls away from that unchangeable good which ought to satisfy it more than itself.
This falling away is spontaneous; for if the will had remained steadfast in the love of that higher and changeless good by which it was illumined to intelligence and kindled into love , it would not have turned away to find satisfaction in itself, and so become frigid and benighted; the woman would not have believed the serpent spoke the truth , nor would the man have preferred the request of his wife to the command of God , nor have supposed that it was a venial trangression to cleave to the partner of his life even in a partnership of sin.
The wicked deed, then — that is to say, the trangression of eating the forbidden fruit — was committed by persons who were already wicked. But that the tree was evil was not the result of nature; for certainly it could become so only by the vice of the will, and vice is contrary to nature. Now, nature could not have been depraved by vice had it not been made out of nothing. Consequently, that it is a nature, this is because it is made by God ; but that it falls away from Him, this is because it is made out of nothing.
But man did not so fall away as to become absolutely nothing; but being turned towards himself, his being became more contracted than it was when he clave to Him who supremely is. Accordingly, to exist in himself, that is, to be his own satisfaction after abandoning God , is not quite to become a nonentity, but to approximate to that. And therefore the holy Scriptures designate the proud by another name, self-pleasers. For it is good to have the heart lifted up, yet not to one's self, for this is proud , but to the Lord, for this is obedient , and can be the act only of the humble.
There is, therefore, something in humility which, strangely enough, exalts the heart, and something in pride which debases it.
- Hopkinton (Images of America).
- W Stands for Women: How the George W. Bush Presidency Shaped a New Politics of Gender;
- Medical Biostatistics, Third Edition (Chapman & Hall/CRC Biostatistics Series).
- Fruit Salad and Dressing Recipes (Salad Recipes Book 15).
- Search form.
- Somewhere Else.
This seems, indeed, to be contradictory, that loftiness should debase and lowliness exalt. But pious humility enables us to submit to what is above us; and nothing is more exalted above us than God ; and therefore humility, by making us subject to God , exalts us. But pride , being a defect of nature, by the very act of refusing subjection and revolting from Him who is supreme, falls to a low condition; and then comes to pass what is written: You cast them down when they lifted up themselves.
For he does not say, when they had been lifted up, as if first they were exalted, and then afterwards cast down; but when they lifted up themselves even then they were cast down — that is to say, the very lifting up was already a fall. And therefore it is that humility is specially recommended to the city of God as it sojourns in this world, and is specially exhibited in the city of God , and in the person of Christ its King; while the contrary vice of pride , according to the testimony of the sacred writings, specially rules his adversary the devil.
And certainly this is the great difference which distinguishes the two cities of which we speak, the one being the society of the godly men, the other of the ungodly, each associated with the angels that adhere to their party, and the one guided and fashioned by love of self, the other by love of God. The devil , then, would not have ensnared man in the open and manifest sin of doing what God had forbidden, had man not already begun to live for himself. For created gods are gods not by virtue of what is in themselves, but by a participation of the true God.
- Oracle Primavera Contract Management, Business Intelligence Publisher Edition v14!
- The School of the Holy Spirit.
- Deathly Silent.
By craving to be more, man becomes less; and by aspiring to be self-sufficing, he fell away from Him who truly suffices him. Accordingly, this wicked desire which prompts man to please himself as if he were himself light, and which thus turns him away from that light by which, had he followed it, he would himself have become light — this wicked desire, I say, already secretly existed in him, and the open sin was but its consequence.
For who counts exaltation ruin, though no sooner is the Highest forsaken than a fall is begun? But who does not recognize it as ruin, when there occurs an evident and indubitable transgression of the commandment? And consequently, God's prohibition had reference to such an act as, when committed, could not be defended on any pretense of doing what was righteous.
And I make bold to say that it is useful for the proud to fall into an open and indisputable transgression, and so displease themselves, as already, by pleasing themselves, they had fallen. For Peter was in a healthier condition when he wept and was dissatisfied with himself, than when he boldly presumed and satisfied himself. And this is averred by the sacred Psalmist when he says, Fill their faces with shame, that they may seek Your name, O Lord; that is, that they who have pleased themselves in seeking their own glory may be pleased and satisfied with You in seeking Your glory.
But it is a worse and more damnable pride which casts about for the shelter of an excuse even in manifest sins , as these our first parents did, of whom the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat; and the man said, The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. For though they do not, like Cain, deny that they have perpetrated the deed, yet their pride seeks to refer its wickedness to another — the woman's pride to the serpent, the man's to the woman.
But where there is a plain trangression of a divine commandment, this is rather to accuse than to excuse oneself. For the fact that the woman sinned on the serpent's persuasion, and the man at the woman's offer, did not make the transgression less, as if there were any one whom we ought rather to believe or yield to than God. Whoever thinks such punishment either excessive or unjust shows his inability to measure the great iniquity of sinning where sin might so easily have been avoided.
For as Abraham's obedience is with justice pronounced to be great, because the thing commanded, to kill his son, was very difficult, so in Paradise the disobedience was the greater, because the difficulty of that which was commanded was imperceptible. For where the penalty annexed to disobedience is great, and the thing commanded by the Creator is easy, who can sufficiently estimate how great a wickedness it is, in a matter so easy, not to obey the authority of so great a power, even when that power deters with so terrible a penalty?
In short, to say all in a word, what but disobedience was the punishment of disobedience in that sin? For what else is man's misery but his own disobedience to himself, so that in consequence of his not being willing to do what he could do, he now wills to do what he cannot? For though he could not do all things in Paradise before he sinned , yet he wished to do only what he could do, and therefore he could do all things he wished. But now, as we recognize in his offspring, and as divine Scripture testifies, Man is like to vanity.
For who can count how many things he wishes which he cannot do, so long as he is disobedient to himself, that is, so long as his mind and his flesh do not obey his will? For in spite of himself his mind is both frequently disturbed, and his flesh suffers, and grows old, and dies; and in spite of ourselves we suffer whatever else we suffer, and which we would not suffer if our nature absolutely and in all its parts obeyed our will.
But is it not the infirmities of the flesh which hamper it in its service? Yet what does it matter how its service is hampered, so long as the fact remains, that by the just retribution of the sovereign God whom we refused to be subject to and serve, our flesh, which was subjected to us, now torments us by insubordination, although our disobedience brought trouble on ourselves, not upon God?
For He is not in need of our service as we of our body's; and therefore what we did was no punishment to Him, but what we receive is so to us. And the pains which are called bodily are pains of the soul in and from the body. For what pain or desire can the flesh feel by itself and without the soul? But when the flesh is said to desire or to suffer, it is meant, as we have explained, that the man does so, or some part of the soul which is affected by the sensation of the flesh, whether a harsh sensation causing pain, or gentle, causing pleasure. But pain in the flesh is only a discomfort of the soul arising from the flesh, and a kind of shrinking from its suffering, as the pain of the soul which is called sadness is a shrinking from those things which have happened to us in spite of ourselves.
But sadness is frequently preceded by fear , which is itself in the soul , not in the flesh; while bodily pain is not preceded by any kind of fear of the flesh, which can be felt in the flesh before the pain. But pleasure is preceded by a certain appetite which is felt in the flesh like a craving, as hunger and thirst and that generative appetite which is most commonly identified with the name lust , though this is the generic word for all desires.
For anger itself was defined by the ancients as nothing else than the lust of revenge; although sometimes a man is angry even at inanimate objects which cannot feel his vengeance, as when one breaks a pen, or crushes a quill that writes badly. Yet even this, though less reasonable, is in its way a lust of revenge, and is, so to speak, a mysterious kind of shadow of [the great law of] retribution, that they who do evil should suffer evil. There is therefore a lust for revenge, which is called anger ; there is a lust of money, which goes by the name of avarice ; there is a lust of conquering, no matter by what means, which is called opinionativeness; there is a lust of applause, which is named boasting.
There are many and various lusts , of which some have names of their own, while others have not. For who could readily give a name to the lust of ruling, which yet has a powerful influence in the soul of tyrants, as civil wars bear witness? Although, therefore, lust may have many objects, yet when no object is specified, the word lust usually suggests to the mind the lustful excitement of the organs of generation. And this lust not only takes possession of the whole body and outward members, but also makes itself felt within, and moves the whole man with a passion in which mental emotion is mingled with bodily appetite, so that the pleasure which results is the greatest of all bodily pleasures.
So possessing indeed is this pleasure, that at the moment of time in which it is consummated, all mental activity is suspended. But even those who delight in this pleasure are not moved to it at their own will, whether they confine themselves to lawful or transgress to unlawful pleasures; but sometimes this lust importunes them in spite of themselves, and sometimes fails them when they desire to feel it, so that though lust rages in the mind , it stirs not in the body. Thus, strangely enough, this emotion not only fails to obey the legitimate desire to beget offspring, but also refuses to serve lascivious lust ; and though it often opposes its whole combined energy to the soul that resists it, sometimes also it is divided against itself, and while it moves the soul , leaves the body unmoved.
Justly is shame very specially connected with this lust ; justly , too, these members themselves, being moved and restrained not at our will , but by a certain independent autocracy, so to speak, are called shameful. Their condition was different before sin. For they were not created blind, as the unenlightened vulgar fancy; for Adam saw the animals to whom he gave names, and of Eve we read, The woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes.
But when they were stripped of this grace , that their disobedience might be punished by fit retribution, there began in the movement of their bodily members a shameless novelty which made nakedness indecent: it at once made them observant and made them ashamed. And therefore, after they violated God's command by open transgression, it is written: And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. And therefore also the tree itself which they were forbidden to touch was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil from this circumstance, that if they ate of it it would impart to them this knowledge.
For the discomfort of sickness reveals the pleasure of health.
Must-Read Books About Witches | Book Riot
They knew , therefore, that they were naked, — naked of that grace which prevented them from being ashamed of bodily nakedness while the law of sin offered no resistance to their mind. And thus they obtained a knowledge which they would have lived in blissful ignorance of, had they, in trustful obedience to God , declined to commit that offense which involved them in the experience of the hurtful effects of unfaithfulness and disobedience. And therefore, being ashamed of the disobedience of their own flesh, which witnessed to their disobedience while it punished it, they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons, that is, cinctures for their privy parts; for some interpreters have rendered the word by succinctoria.
Campestria is, indeed, a Latin word, but it is used of the drawers or aprons used for a similar purpose by the young men who stripped for exercise in the campus ; hence those who were so girt were commonly called campestrati. Shame modestly covered that which lust disobediently moved in opposition to the will, which was thus punished for its own disobedience. Consequently all nations, being propagated from that one stock, have so strong an instinct to cover the shameful parts, that some barbarians do not uncover them even in the bath, but wash with their drawers on.
In the dark solitudes of India also, though some philosophers go naked, and are therefore called gymnosophists, yet they make an exception in the case of these members and cover them. Lust requires for its consummation darkness and secrecy; and this not only when un lawful intercourse is desired, but even such fornication as the earthly city has legalized. Where there is no fear of punishment, these permitted pleasures still shrink from the public eye.
Even where provision is made for this lust , secrecy also is provided; and while lust found it easy to remove the prohibitions of law, shamelessness found it impossible to lay aside the veil of retirement. For even shameless men call this shameful; and though they love the pleasure, dare not display it. Does not even conjugal intercourse, sanctioned as it is by law for the propagation of children, legitimate and honorable though it be, does it not seek retirement from every eye?
Uncensored advice for a better life
Before the bridegroom fondles his bride, does he not exclude the attendants, and even the paranymphs, and such friends as the closest ties have admitted to the bridal chamber? The greatest master of Roman eloquence says, that all right actions wish to be set in the light, i. This right action, however, has such a desire to be known , that yet it blushes to be seen. Who does not know what passes between husband and wife that children may be born? Is it not for this purpose that wives are married with such ceremony? One scene involves a kissing game at a party, which doesn't actually happen. For reasons yet to be explained, Mal and Ben dream about each other.
Aside from the nonstop references to events and conflicts in dozens of Disney products on nearly every page, the goblins serve their brews in Starbucks sizes, and one of the riddles the beauty-queen character solves involves the colors of Revlon lipsticks. One of the chapters is called "The Girl with the Double Dragon Tattoo," a reference to the non-kid-friendly thriller series. And so on. In an apparent effort to distinguish the series from G-rated Disney fare, characters say "crap" a fair amount.
Add your rating See all 5 parent reviews. Add your rating See all 10 kid reviews. Meanwhile, in the kingdom of Auradon, the villains are gone but, as Prince Ben, son of Beauty and the Beast , discovers, there's trouble in paradise. On the one hand, she knew she should stay away from Mal if she wanted to be safe, but on the other, she never got to hang out with kids her age. I'll see you at home, sweetie. Do you know any kids whose parents seem like kind of awful people, but the kids are nice? What kinds of difficulties does this cause? Pick a Disney villain not in this book and create a character who's his or her child.
What's the kid like? Would you be friends with him or her? Common Sense Media's unbiased ratings are created by expert reviewers and aren't influenced by the product's creators or by any of our funders, affiliates, or partners. See how we rate. Common Sense Media, a nonprofit organization, earns a small affiliate fee from Amazon or iTunes when you use our links to make a purchase.
Thank you for your support. Our ratings are based on child development best practices. We display the minimum age for which content is developmentally appropriate. The star rating reflects overall quality and learning potential. Learn how we rate. Google Tag Manager. For Your Family Log in Sign me up. Parents' Ultimate Guide to Support our work!
Want personalized picks that fit your family? Set preferences to see our top age-appropriate picks for your kids. Melissa de la Cruz Fantasy Rate book. Read or buy. Based on 5 reviews. Based on 10 reviews. Get it now Searching for streaming and purchasing options Common Sense is a nonprofit organization. Your purchase helps us remain independent and ad-free. Get it now on Searching for streaming and purchasing options A lot or a little? The parents' guide to what's in this book. Educational Value. Positive Messages. Multiple uses of "crap," "poop," and the like.
Continue reading Show less.