LUST.
“Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lusts.”—James
_Letter_, chap. i. 14.
Lust may be defined to be the desire for self-gratification. The
forbidden fruit is that which seems to be desired to make one happy,
and is sought after, not for the purpose of supplying a need, but to
gratify a desire.
Man’s constitution is such that there are needs pertaining to every
part thereof; and those needs are indicated by awakening desires; and
when the need is supplied, a pleasure or gratification is experienced,
which is a sort of plaudit of “Well done;” and all legitimate pleasure
or happiness which man is constitutionally fitted to enjoy arises from
complying with the proper demands of his being. All constitutional
demands of the being man have strict reference to constitutional needs;
and the life and energy making that demand will not be disregarded. It
will not suffer the being to find rest until the demand is complied
with. It will create restlessness and disquiet; and the individual will
give expression to that life and energy in some direction, if he does
not in the true one.
Man possesses within him immortal energies, or he could not be
immortal. He has that which is essentially being and life, and
which can not be destroyed. Hence his divine energies will act with
omnipotent power to him, and he will be constrained to submit.
Here, then, is to be found the fundamental distinction between true
and false impulse—true and false action. That impulse which arises
within, indicating a need of some department of our being, is true and
legitimate; and all proper action which tends to supply that demand,
without conflicting with any other need, is true action. All other
action and impulse are illegitimate. The distinction between the two
classes of impulse and action is easily made, by an appeal to our own
consciousness. By a careful examination, we can tell at once whether
the impulse to perform any act for ourselves arises from a sense of
need or from a desire of self-gratification; and whether the impulse
to perform any act for others arises from a near or remote prospect of
self-gain, or from a sense of fitness, justice, or goodness of the act,
in forgetfulness of separate self.
In the very outset I postulate the following as undeniable truth: All
_true_ desire in man has respect to a need of some department of his
being, which, when truly supplied, will harmoniously develop him in
respect to every other department of _his_ being, and also in respect
to all other beings necessarily connected with him. That all _true_
happiness or enjoyment which he is capable of possessing must flow as a
consequence of truly supplying these needs; and that while every need
of his being is fully supplied, he will be in the enjoyment of all the
happiness he is capable of desiring, and consequently will not desire
happiness on its own account.
I postulate further; that until every need is supplied, man will feel
a sense of lack, a desire for something which he does not possess,
the tendency of which will be to stimulate him to activity in some
direction; and unless his activity is directed to the proper supplying
of the need, it will be misdirected, and will tend to _deprave_ rather
than to _improve_ his being.
Hence I postulate further, that when man feels within himself a desire
for happiness, he has demonstrable evidence that these are needs of
his being which have not been supplied; and any attempt to fulfill
his desire, short of finding out and supplying the true need, will be
derogatory to his highest good and destiny, and will consequently fail
of conferring that which he seeks, happiness.
I therefore postulate further, that happiness or enjoyment is not to
be sought; that if it come at all, it must come unsought; that it is a
necessary and inseparable incident of the true life, by which is meant
that life which in its activity fulfills its every need. That happiness
which is sought after is never found, simply because it is not an
_end_, but only an _incident_ of being; and that while man is absorbed
in the pursuit of pleasure, he must necessarily be unmindful of his
needs, and thereby he will neglect their demands.
Here we have the foundation laid for examining the distinction between
the true impulse, known as love in the various planes of unfolding, and
that which is to be characterized as lust. The true impulse is that
which indicates a need of some department of our being, and which
prompts to activity, looking to the supply of that need, independent
of any gratification which it may promise. The false impulse is that
which prompts to activity, not in respect to any specific need, but in
respect to the gratification which it may afford. This latter impulse
is known as lust.
For the purpose of distinction I shall denominate the true impulse,
_love_, as being a manifestation of the Divine Father’s wisdom and
goodness, in whatever plane it may be found; and I shall denominate the
false impulse, _lust_, as being a manifestation of that which tends to
lead to selfishness and antagonism, and makes the interests of finite
self overrule those of infinite self, or the selfhood of the divine.
In the scale of being there is every plane of unfolding, from the
unconscious to the divine consciousness; that is, there is every sphere
of divine action and manifestation, from the monad to the highest
angel, and consequently there are many degrees of love as the true
impulse to action. It has its sphere in the plane of physical need, in
the plane of intellectual and moral need, and in the plane of religious
need; and it is exalted just in proportion as it approaches the
absolute or divine.
As there is a true impulse belonging to every plane of unfolding,
begetting the proper enjoyment in the conscious plane when its demand
is properly complied with, so also is there every degree of lustful
desire seeking gratification in every plane, differing in grossness
according to the _means_ by which it seeks its gratification.
Reflection will satisfy every truth-seeking mind that desire for
self-gratification, as an impulse to action, has its basis in self;
and, from its nature, makes itself the center of attraction, and
becomes a sort of an absorbent, seeking self-appropriation; and
whenever it makes an expenditure, it is with respect to that which is
to return. And it never gives without the hope of receiving in return a
full equivalent.
This principle of action is from its nature finite and antagonistic,
upon the principle that that which it seeks to appropriate to its own
benefit and make its own, can not at the same time be appropriated by
another; and hence the desire of self-appropriation naturally leads the
individual into antagonism with others.
This finite and selfish impulse is the very opposite of the infinity
and unselfishness of the divine. Its imperfect and antagonistic rule
of action can not harmonize with the perfection and harmonic action of
the divine. As the finite in every respect is the negative and opposite
of the infinite, so this finite impulse in the individual is in every
respect the negative and opposite of the divine impulse. It is for this
cause that there is such an antagonism between the principle of love
and the principle of lust; an antagonism which must continue until the
divine shall bring all into subjection—until the finite shall, in its
principle of action, harmonize in the infinite, or until God shall
become _all_ in _all_.
Having already postulated that all true and legitimate desire in
the individual has strict reference to the needs of the individual,
independent of any promised gratification, and that the gratification
incident to the supply of such needs was the measure of all true
finite happiness, I now proceed to illustrate this truth by an appeal
to the experience of all who hear me.
Happiness, in its general sense, is the fulfillment of desire. And the
more complete is the fulfillment of every desire, the more complete is
the happiness; and happiness can not be perfect until every desire is
fulfilled. If in fulfilling the desire of one department of our being
we neglect the needs and consequent demands of another, we may obtain
temporary gratification, but it does not answer the full demand of our
being so as to confer happiness. On the contrary, while we gratify a
lust, we resist a true demand, and purchase gratification by disease
and suffering.
The individual, ignorant or unmindful of the true demands of his being,
and intent upon self-gratification, must forever fail of obtaining
happiness, because in his lustful pursuit he does not heed the real
demands of his entire being, and therefore he does not minister to
their needs; and hence can not obtain ease and satisfaction. All
pleasure-seekers can testify as they have testified, that their
pleasures are more in anticipation than participation. Their happiness
is in the future, and seldom if ever in the present. The time never
comes when they find every desire gratified, and consequently they are
never quite contented, therefore never quite happy. The very desire
after happiness is that which defeats it. The finite belongs to the
present; the _past_ is his schoolmaster, teaching him in the _present_
how to receive the future. His duties and needs are of _to-day_, and
those which pertain to the morrow will come on the morrow, not before.
“Sufficient unto the day are the evils thereof,” and sufficient
unto the day are the _duties_ and _pleasures_ thereof. Man can not
take being and existence by anticipation, neither can he take their
true incidents in that way. All anticipations of pleasure by which
the individual is made to live in the future, to the neglect of the
present, are lustful and illegitimate, and antagonize with man’s true
nature and destiny, and consequently tend to defeat true happiness.
That this is so, all human experience affirms. That this must be so,
the philosophy of true happiness demonstrates.
There is no room for controversy upon this point. It is most evident
that true happiness can only flow to the finite by fulfilling the true
desires of the finite, and that complete satisfaction can only take
place when every true desire or demand is complied with.
Now it must follow that every true desire is indicative of a real need
of the being in which it exists; and consequently when every need is
supplied, every true desire must be gratified, and true happiness must
be the result. And as every need has respect to that which pertains
to the _present_, every true desire belongs to the present, and asks
present fulfillment.
From considerations of this kind it becomes evident that anticipated
pleasures are illegitimate, and belong to the school of lusts, and
do not tend to beget true happiness; and that just in proportion as
the individual is absorbed in the anticipated pleasures or duties of
the morrow, he is disregarding the true law of his being, neglecting
present needs, and laying the foundation for defeating the very end
he seeks. Man, as a physical, intellectual, moral, and religious
being, has needs pertaining to each and every department thereof,
and consequently in supplying these needs he becomes receptive of
pleasure from every department of his being. When he is truly and
harmoniously unfolded, all his needs are orderly and harmoniously set
forth; and when he truly complies with their demand, his delights or
gratifications blend or flow together in one harmonious stream, and
his whole soul is filled with the divinest melody, instinct with the
_present_ God. But note, the moment he neglects a single need, or
misdirects the energies of his being, there is not only a strain which
is not represented in the choral anthem of God, but it is caused to
vibrate discordantly with those strains which are represented, and
instead of a soul pulsating with the divinest melody and joy, you have
it harshly jarring to the discordant notes of antagonism and death.
The principles of this philosophy affirm that man must attend to
the needs of every department of his being, if he would develop
harmoniously. The Divine, in the plenitude of his wisdom, has given
to man nothing superfluous. His physical body, with its needs, is
just as essential to the perfect man as is his spiritual being; and
its demands are as imperative in their sphere. And man is as really
obeying the Divine in truly administering to his physical as to his
spiritual needs; and the pleasures attending the true administration
are as true and just in their sphere as are those pertaining to more
exalted spheres of being and action. He who despises and afflicts
his body to benefit his soul mistakes the divine order and method,
and in afflicting his body wars with the true interests and destiny
of his immortal being. The disposition to afflict the body for the
benefit of the soul is that higher manifestation of the selfish and
lustful principle turning its weapons purposely upon itself. Its aim is
self-gain, and, through that, self-gratification. Hence the cloistered
nun, the solitary monk, and the stern ascetic, of whatever school, are
violating the divine method and law as much as is the pleasure-seeking
worldling. They are as really under the dominion of their lusts for
self-gratification as any other class. Their expenditure of worldly
pleasure has respect to the spiritual, which they hope thereby to
obtain; and, like any other selfish being, they only act with respect
to some expected gain, bringing with it enjoyment or gratification.
The great error of the world is that it does not distinguish between
the true and false impulse, giving rise to true and false action, out
of which grows true and false development, bringing existence into
antagonism and false relation.
Said the Divine Teacher, speaking of little children, “Of such is the
kingdom of heaven.” The infant at birth instinctively obeys the law of
its being, and it continues to do so in every department of its being
which does not come under the rule of its conscious, voluntary action.
When it feels the demand for food to nourish and develop its infantile
body, it indicates that demand by its restlessness and complainings;
and when the demand is supplied, its complainings cease. It does not
ask for gratification beyond the supply of its needs; _that_ it does
ask for, and must have to give it quiet. During this early period
it eats to live, and continues to do so until, by its development,
another nature with its needs is brought into conscious existence, and
neglected. Then the unsatisfied demands of that other nature impart
disquiet to the being, and he begins to search after gratification. It
is in this way that lust is begotten. It is never felt until the demand
of some need is neglected, and it is an immutable law that such neglect
must beget lust; and hence whoever feels the demand for gratification
of any sort hears the voice of God within proclaiming a neglected
demand, a perishing need. He sees the cherubim of God standing at
the gate of Paradise, with a drawn sword of flame turning in every
direction, guarding the tree of life. Thus man’s lusts proclaim his
imperishable needs, and, when truly understood, they are but the echo
of God’s voice calling upon him to return and live.
The child naturally comes under the dominion of its lusts through
ignorance. It feels the disquieting influence of its neglected needs;
it feels discontented and unhappy, and therefore it seeks gratification
in such direction as experience has taught it it might sometimes be
found. He early learns the pleasures of sense. He could not comply with
the demands of his physical nature without knowing them; hence, when he
feels a demand for something—he does not know what—what more natural
than that he should seek sensual gratification. Thus it is according
to the figure, that man partakes of the forbidden fruit before his
eyes are opened to know good and evil. His first disobedience is in
consequence of his ignorance of the nature and requirements of his
needs; and, seeking to obtain gratification, he violates the true
law of his being. But as man has needs pertaining to his physical,
intellectual, moral, and religious natures, and as there are pleasures
pertaining to the proper supplying of them, man’s lusts may lead him
to act in either the physical, intellectual, or moral and religious
departments; and, as already remarked, the _grossness_ of the lust will
depend upon the plan and the means by which it seeks gratification.
Reflection will demonstrate that the different lusts, as they are
called, differ not in the primary impulse, but differ in the manner of
seeking gratification. Man, in the external and finite of his being,
may be differently affected by the different modes of gratification
which his lust prompts him to seek. Thus the physical effect produced
upon him by seeking gratification through his appetite for strong
drink, will be different from that produced upon him by seeking
gratification through his relish for food or social amusement. Seeking
gratification through the improper exercise of any of the faculties of
the body or mind tends to produce injury in two ways.
First, the tendency is to call off the attention from the actual
needs of the being, so that the proper demands are neglected, and
thereby lustful desires become intensified by the influx of an
unnatural degree of energy in that false direction. And second, by
overtaxing the capacity of those organs which are used for lustful
gratification. Thus the inebriate and glutton who make use of their
appetites as a means of gratification, often weaken and disease the
organs of digestion and assimilation, and thereby disqualify them
for performing their proper functions. Man can not engage in lustful
exercises without subjecting himself to these twofold evils. And
their manifestation will be according to the plane of the lust and the
means adopted for its gratification. But while lusts differ thus in
their modes of expression, as well as in their primary and secondary
effects upon the individual, they are all alike in their inception,
and in the end sought to be attained. They all have their beginning in
the neglect of some need, which creates a sense of lack, and they all
seek self-gratification irrespective of such need; so that all lust, in
whatever plane found, is alike in its origin and end. All are fatal to
true happiness.
The general sameness of character of all lusts accounts for the
singular compounds and apparent incongruities of character found in
certain individuals. That is, it is not unfrequent to find individuals
remarkable for their zeal in politics, morals, and religion, carried
away at times by the grossest lusts. Men, eminent for their piety,
sometimes have been notorious for their intemperance and lewdness; and
the world have been astonished at it. But a careful attention to the
distinction to be made between the true impulse and lust soon solves
the mystery. Such men are pre-eminently under the influence of lust in
every department of their being—in the moral and religious as well as
in the physical. The piety of such men may be ever so deep and earnest,
yet its basis is in use. They see nothing in the Divine character or
perfections which excites in them love or admiration any further than
it is to bear upon their own well-being and happiness. Their love of
God is a love of the instrument or means by which they are to become
supremely blessed. And their love, after all, is a love of their own
happiness, and of God as essential to their happiness. If they should
discover that God stood in the way of their future enjoyment, they
would like him no better than any other enemy.
Such minds mistake lust for love, and in seeking their own happiness
call it seeking God; and in rejoicing in their anticipations, call it
rejoicing in God. The man that seeks religion for the sake of securing
to himself salvation and endless delight, is just as lustful and
selfish as he who seeks gratification in any other way. Man may go a
whoring after strange gods as well as after strange women.
Those who appeal to men to get religion in order that they may escape
misery and secure happiness, appeal to their lusts, and so far as
they influence them by their appeals to their hopes and fears, they
stimulate them to lust. The individual who seeks religion for the
purpose of saving his soul, is exercising the very impulse which most
of all tends to defeat his salvation. Hence said Jesus upon this very
point, “Whosoever seeketh to save his life shall lose it,” etc. The
very impulse is as selfish and undivine as possible. It is for this
very reason that the influence of the popular religions of the day is
not redemptive in its character. To say to the world that when all
should be converted to the religion of these fashionable churches, the
millennium would come, would provoke in the highest degree their sense
of the ludicrous. Their lustful seeking after self-gratification is so
apparent and gross, that they can not even deceive themselves.
It will not be considered a false declaration when I say, that there
is no possible resemblance of character or practice between these
modern fashionable Christians and Jesus of Nazareth. The redemptive
principle of the religion of Jesus can not be found in their religion.
The difference is, Jesus was seeking the kingdom of heaven and its
righteousness, while they are seeking self-gratification. The impulse
in Jesus was that of religious love; theirs is a religious lust. The
impulse in Jesus led him to hunger and thirst after righteousness;
theirs leads them to hunger and thirst after the things of sense.
Jesus, in the things pertaining to the world, was the Lazarus; they are
the Dives.
Furthermore, I must be permitted to say that the popular religions of
the day are manifestations of man’s lustful character, in the moral and
religious plane; and that it is more difficult to reform a man in his
moral and religious lusts than it is in his animal lusts. It was for
this reason that Jesus pronounced his severest woes upon the Scribes
and Pharisees, who thought they were righteous and who despised others.
Hence he said to them, “Ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against
yourselves.” Also, “The publicans and harlots do pass into the kingdom
of heaven before you.”
The proposition reduced to its simplest form is this: True religion
can not dwell with lust. “Ye can not serve God and mammon.” But the
religion of the Pharisee of every age is lust in its highest and most
impregnable plane. Hence the more of such proposed religion they have,
the farther are they from true religion. Jesus was condemning lust in
the moral or charitable plane when he directed that alms should be done
in secret. The impulse to charitable deeds which looks to self-gain or
self-gratification, brings no reward to the soul of the giver. If he is
prompted by a desire after fame, or from a hope of inward satisfaction,
he does not act from the true impulse. He who sounds the trumpet in
the world or in his soul, to call attention to his charities, can have
no reward of his Father in heaven. He who acts from the true divine
impulse acts spontaneously, acts as it were involuntarily; that is, he
is not aware that he wills. His left hand knows not what his right hand
doeth. He meets with a case of need. He stops not to argue the question
and determine probabilities and uses. The steel and the flint are in
contact, and the spark, comes forth.
In the domestic relation of husband and wife, parent and child, brother
and sister, there is much of this moral lust which is mistaken for
love. Many professing to be husbands, and really thinking themselves to
be so, love the _use_ of their wives better than the wife, just as the
lustful in religion love the _use_ of God better than God.
It is this mistaking _lust_ for _love_ which begets so many unhappy
marriages. The considerations leading to the union are not unfrequently
of a lustful character altogether. Thus the young man seeking a wife
is constantly trying the question of use. She will administer to his
comfort in this way and that, and upon the whole she will be the
means of making him very happy. It will not be denied that in a vast
majority of cases the man, in seeking a wife, is seeking after his own
happiness, and he will cherish her while she conduces to that end.
But if he finds himself disappointed—finds that she fails to fulfill
his expectation—the ardor of his love begins to abate; and just in
proportion as he is disappointed in his expectations will he grow cold
and neglectful. So common is this that it has arrested the attention
of universal man. The difference between the fondness manifested
while yet the newly-wedded pair have met with no disappointments,
and that which is manifested a few weeks or months later, has given
rise to the expression “_the honey-moon_,” meaning that the age of a
single moon is usually sufficient to reveal the imperfections of the
loving pair, and consequently to cause the ardor of their love to
abate. The husband does not find in the wife all that he anticipated.
She is not so perfectly adapted to making him happy as he had hoped.
Consequently he is disappointed. And as his happiness was the object of
his pursuit when he was seeking a wife, and he mistook that lust for
self-gratification for love for the wife, being disappointed in his
lust, he finds little or nothing of love left.
It is thus, by mistaking lust for love, that so many disappointments
take place, and so many unhappy unions are formed; and while the
individuals are under this lust for self-gratification, there is little
hope of their doing better a second time. It was in reference to this
lustful and selfish love that Jesus said unless a man loved him or his
doctrines with a better and purer love than that with which he loved
wife, children, parents, etc., he could not become his disciple. The
simple truth of the expression was, that man’s love, or the love of the
world, was lustful; and unless man loved God and truth with a purer
love than that lustful love, he could not be a true disciple.
The same lustful impulse is found in the parental and fraternal
relation. Man is so naturally selfish and lustful, that it is found in
every relation, leading him into the broad road to disobedience and
sin. And herein is manifested the deep excellence of the morality of
Jesus, that it aimed a fatal blow at the lust itself, and thus “laid
the axe at the root of the tree.” “His fan was in his hand, and he
thoroughly purged his floor,” “gathering the wheat into the garner, and
burning the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
In man’s social relations the same lust after self-gratification is
found. The friendships of the world have this lustful basis, and herein
are they distinguished from true friendship. The selfish man or woman
seeks social and friendly intercourse for the pleasure or gratification
it affords. They cultivate social and friendly relations solely with
respect to the pleasures thereof. Consequently their love of _friends_
is only in their _use_ to them. They love their own gratification
supremely, and they love the use of that which will administer
thereto—consequently their attachments turn upon the question of
gratification. They do nothing, they love nothing in forgetfulness of
separate self.
This distinction between true love and lust is to be made in every
plane. The true impulse in every plane is the manifestation of the
present God in that plane. The obeying that impulse is obeying God.
The harmonizing with it is harmonizing with God; and the individual
who in all things walks in accordance with its principles is walking
with God, and is in the straight and narrow path which leadeth unto
life; while he who, on the contrary, is led by his desire after
self-gratification, in whatever plane, is in the broad road which
leads to antagonism and death. “His lusts, when they conceive, bring
forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.”
There is no middle ground between _love_ and _lust_; and unless the
distinction be taken where I have taken it, it can not be taken at all.
Excuse the principle of seeking after gratification as a true incentive
to action, and you have destroyed the distinction between purity and
impurity—between truth and falsehood—between holiness and sin. If
action in respect to use and the gratification of self be the highest,
then, indeed, there is no God—no virtue—no right. Such is the ultimate
conclusion of those who know of no higher rule of action than pertains
to the sphere of use and gratification. They know of no intrinsic
virtue, goodness, purity, etc. They affirm of existence the qualities
of good or bad from results. They say that a thing is right or wrong
because the result is wrong, and not that the result was wrong because
the thing itself was intrinsically bad.
This is a very common error with the world. They are apt to trace
the evil in the result and overlook it in the cause. The reason that
lustful action is pernicious is not because its results are bad, but
because the condition itself is intrinsically false, and can not
produce other than false fruit.
We sum up in this. Man will never feel the need of that which he does
not lack. He will never feel the need of happiness or gratification so
long as every demand of his nature is gratified; because the compliance
with every demand of his being will of itself confer all that he can
desire, and he will be satisfied. Hence the desire for that which he
does not possess demonstrates that there are true and just demands of
his being which are not complied with.
Therefore any attempt to satisfy that desire, short of complying with
the true demand, will result in begetting false action, which will tend
to overtax and disease some part of his organism, creating an unnatural
demand in that department, which, instead of bringing satisfaction
and content, will bring restlessness and disquiet, calling for still
further gratification. Thus lust, when it is conceived, bringeth forth
a violation of the normal or healthy condition, which is sin; and that
sin in its work, when finished, bringeth forth death.