XII. *Indeed every indulgence of the body in eating and drinking, is adding to its power over the soul.
A man that makes every day a day of _full_ and _chearful_ meals, will by degrees make the happiness of every day depend upon it, and consider every thing with regard to it.
He will go to _church_ or stay at home, as it suits with his _dinner_, and not scruple to tell you, that he generally eats too heartily to go to afternoon service.
Now such people are under a worse disorder than the _jaundice_, and have their sight more perverted than he that sees all things _yellow_.
For what discernment have they, who have more taste for the preparations of the _kitchen_, than for the comforts of the house of God: who chuse rather to make themselves _unfit_ for divine service, than to baulk the pleasure of a _full meal_?
Can they think they have the Spirit of Christ who are thus enslaved to _gluttony_? Or can they be said, to have forsaken all to follow him, who will not so much as forsake _half a meal_ for the worship of God?
XIII. I know it will be thought too severe to call that _gluttony_, because it is the practice of numbers of people of _worth_ and _reputation_. But I hope they will turn their dislike of the name into a dislike of the thing: for ’tis as certainly _gluttony_ as picking of pockets is stealing.
The sin of gluttony is the sin of over-eating. Now this may be difficult to state exactly in some cases. But he that owns he eats so much as renders him _indisposed_ for the public worship of God, has determined against himself, and put his own case out of all question.
Men may fancy, they are only guilty of _gluttony_, who eat till they _surfeit_ their bodies. They may think those only guilty of _drunkenness_, who drink till they have lost their senses. But there is a much surer rule to go by; _whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of_ God. All therefore in eating and drinking that is not to the glory of God, is offered to something that is not the glory of God; it is offered to the corruption and sensuality of our natures. It is the sin of intemperance; and is indevotion too, when indulged at a time that keeps us from the public worship of God.
XIV. *Indeed a constant course of full feeding is the death of the soul, and every day that is a day of such happiness, is a day lost to religion.
When a man has rejoiced himself with full eating and drinking, he is like any other animal, disposed only to _play_ or _idleness_. He has no more feeling of sin than he has of _hunger_, and can no more perceive himself to be a _miserable fallen_ creature, than he can perceive himself to be a _beggar_.
For this course of sensual enjoyments, is as contrary to a true sense of sin, as it is contrary to a state of _beggary and want_; and a man in such happiness, can no more feel the _weight of sin_, than he can feel himself in the _misery of poverty_.
XV. I know some object, that fasting is not an _universal_ duty; but fit for some particular cases, and particular constitutions.
To this I answer, if by fasting you mean an entire abstinence from food, for such a space of time, in this sense it is not an universal duty.
But this is quite a wrong notion of it. For the fasting whereof I speak is not any _fixed degree_ of abstinence from all food: but, such an exercise of abstinence and self-denial as is proper to every one’s particular state.
Now in this sense fasting is as constant and universal a duty as repentance.
For as repentance is an _universal_ duty, because the reason of it is common to all men; so is fasting, because sensuality, and fleshly lusts, is the _universal_ corruption of all men.
It is no _fixed degree_ of sorrow that is the common repentance of all men. It is no _fixed form_ or _length_ or _hour_ of prayer, that is the common devotion of all men. Yet are these _ constant_ and _universal_ duties.
In like manner, though fasting be subject to all the same variations, yet is it a _constant_ and _universal_ duty.
XVI. *_Justus_ is a grave, sober man. He is very angry at those who neglect fasting. He thinks they know nothing of religion.
But presently after, _Justus_ will tell you, that he never fasts but on _Good Friday_, and the 30th of _January_.
If _Justus_ had lived before the murder of King _Charles_, he had had but one fast in the year. Yet in all likelihood he would then have stood up for the _doctrine_ of fasting.
If a man was to be angry at those who neglect the service of the church, as people that know nothing of religion, and then tell you, that he himself never goes thither but on _Good Friday_, and the 30th of _January_, you would say, that he knew nothing of the nature of church service.
Now _Justus_ shews the same ignorance of the nature of _ fasting_.
If prayer and repentance and the service of the church, were not common acts of devotion, and necessary ways of worshipping God, they would not be necessary on _Good Friday_.