Category Archives: A Discourse on Fornication

A Discourse on Fornication

The Limits of Language in the Discussion of Fornication: Modern Issues of Sex Contrived from Archaic Beliefs

Samantha Stanley 

The Limits of Language in the Discussion of Fornication: Modern Issues of Sex Contrived from Archaic Beliefs

My group edited the 17th century document “A DISCOURSE ON FORNICATION” by John Turner. Turner argues against fornication outside the confines of marriage, making three main points about the act of fornication and the evils derived from going against God’s word: “That Fornication is a Violation of God’s positive Law, in the original Institution of Marriage. That it is expresly forbidden in the Gospel, and absolutely inconsistent with that pure and holy Life, which the Christian Religion requires from us. Lastly, From the natural Turpitude of it, and the Evils and pernicious Consequences that attend it.”

While the text itself is dated and lacks total consequence in society today, these ideas still exist in our lawmaking practices and in religious groups which participate in politics. Political issues centered on abortion, women’s health, contraceptives, and STDs all come back to these basic ideas of religion and sin that Turner discusses. While western society currently is becoming increasingly more socially aware, political debates around sexual health and women’s rights still lean heavily on ideas rooted in Turner’s rhetoric. By the end of his piece Turner states “Deliver thy self therefore from the strange Woman, even from the Stranger that flattereth with her Words” (Turner 53). The patriarchal construction of gender is therefore the basis of the sin of fornication.

The men Turner is attempting to protect, he believes, are only tempted to sin because women are consciously inciting temptation. Judith Butler, in Gender Trouble, explores the distinction between sex and gender which relates to the construction of the self and the “temptations” Turner believes are incited by women. As Butler points out “If gender is the cultural meanings that the sexed body assumes, then a gender cannot be said to follow from a sex in any one way” (Butler 6). The cultural meanings Butler mentions are those which have been established by men themselves. Turner attempts to blame women for the sin of fornication, conflating sex and gender as based off the two-sex model, but when he does this he is failing to acknowledge the construction of women as created by men in order to please men. That is, “Womanhood” is a construction perpetuated and problematized by men. It is also constructed so all blame of sin within religion can be put on women instead of the main perpetrators of rape.

I was fascinated by the construction of gender which Turner conflates with sex and the limitations of his rhetoric. He relieves men of all responsibility and uses religion to blame women for all sins of fornication, often repeating himself instead of using substantial evidence to condemn women. All of his ideas on fornication and why human beings need to resist the sin, however, seem pointless, as he prefaces the piece with “This is in no Sin more practised than in those of Adultery and Fornication. Adultery may possibly be allowed to have somewhat of Ill in it; especially on the Womans Side” (Turner 1). By stating that the sin is heavily practiced and then relieving perpetrators of any responsibility, and then blaming the nature of women, Turner is undermining his own argument. He blames women but does not suggest any modes to deal with the issue. The argument is limited by set definitions of words which have been defined in a patriarchal context; “Whether gender or sex is fixed or free is a function of a discourse which, it will be suggested, seeks to set certain limits to analysis or to safeguard certain tenets of humanism as presuppositional to any analysis of gender” (Butler 9). While the problems Turner analyzes are modern and consistent, he is undermined by his own use of language which is closely defined as only existing in a smaller, less informed sphere than what our current society inhabits. The definition of gender used by Turner is patriarchal because the construction is based on the two-sex model which describes women as being inferior and morally weak in comparison to men. As parts of Western society still cling to these inherently oppressive concepts, we still have laws which work to harm and target women; namely, abortion, access to contraceptives, and access general sexual health practices.

The publication of this document in 1650 seems redundant when looking back on the numerous arguments made against fornication by the very same men who were easily tempted by prostitutes and other women in servile positions. By examining this document through the lens of twenty-first century feminist rhetoric the argument against continually subjecting our people to these archaic beliefs through unfair laws seems like the only plausible argument. While a significant portion of our society has deserted religion in favor of living according to one’s own ideas of morality and freedom, and even more so a diversity of religion has taken the place of a focus on Christianity, our laws still seem to uphold a rigidly patriarchal concepts due to the heterosexual white cisgendered men who remain in power. By examining these texts through feminist ideologies, we can construct a new rhetoric to better combat injustices that have been reoccurring for many centuries since.

Works Cited
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York:Routledge, 1990. Print.

Turner, John. A DISCOURSE ON FORNICATION. Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) Creation Partnership. 1698.

A Discourse on Fornication

Editing “A Discourse on Fornication”

For the 18th century archival project, my group edited a piece titled “A Discourse on Fornication: Showing the Greatness of that Sin; and Examining the Excuses pleased for it, from the Examples of Ancient Times” by J. Turner. According to the title page, J. Turner was a Church lecturer, and this pamphlet was printed at the request of the churchgoers. It is likely that this was a  sermon that J. Turner gave, and afterwards the members of the parish wanted a copy of it for further study. The printing press would be the only efficient way to distribute this lecture. This information also suggests that Turner is writing for a very small audience that he knows well and shares religious beliefs with. This text explores the roles of concubines in the Bible and has a conservative approach to marriage, divorce, and sexuality. According to Turner, only first marriages are legitimate. If a person were to divorce and remarry, they would be committing adultery. However, “they mention of Abraham, and Jacob, and Solomon, and Jephtha that had Concubines and yet they are Characterized in Scripture for Good Men, and highly favour’d of God” (Turner 15). The inclusion of concubines and second wives in the Bible complicate Turner’s assertion that only first marriages are legitimate, since these sins did not diminish the greatness of ancient kings and prophets. While concubines exist in the Bible, Turner’s final assertion is that people should abstain from fornication, that marriage should be upheld, and God will deal with the adulterers and prostitutes (Turner 33). These three claims reaffirms the beliefs on marriage that would have been held by his audience at the church he was reading this to.

According to Roy Porter’s work English Society in the 18th Century, double standards for wives regarding adultery and divorce were both socially acceptable and part of the legal institution. A man could have an affair without it tarnishing his reputation while a woman could be ruined for being adulterous. For legal purposes, it was extremely important that women remain loyal to their husbands because their infidelity could create a false heir (Porter 25). Porter also points out that this double standard was also supported in divorce laws because “a wife’s adultery was ground enough in law for divorce, but not vice versa” (Porter 25). Turner pushes against this by emphasizing the spiritual importance of both husbands and wife remaining loyal in their marriage.  For Turner, the inclusion of concubines and second wives in the Bible do not support Christian men having extramarital sexual relations. While this argument does suggest a kind of equality, it also eliminates any possibility for divorce which could be disastrous for men and women alike. Divorce already was seldom granted and only under extreme circumstances which did not include abuse, and Turner’s argument takes it this even further.

After reading Turner’s speech, I was wondering what his alternatives to divorce were. It is overly optimistic to assume that everyone will have a loving or even mutually respectful marriage, especially during the eighteenth century when women were regarded as property. As a twenty-first century, largely secular individual, it seems overly cruel to mandate that a person must stay in an awful marriage out of fear of offending God. If an individual were to get divorced and live a life of celibacy, would that be a suitable solution since there would be no “adulterous” fornication? This would be extremely hard to enforce, and would probably only work under if the divorced individuals entered a community like a monastery. Turner also does not explore annulment as an option for ending marriage, though it may be more suitable since this decision comes from a church figure rather than a legal entity. Annulment could also be suitable because it erases a marriage rather than legally separating the couple. Turner uses many Biblical examples to build and defend his argument against divorce, and knows how to appeal to his religious audience. However, his argument is not practical enough to have an impact on the larger society who may not share the same religious beliefs. While it took many years for it to become more equal and accessible to men and women, divorce laws were eventually reformed to reflect the societal need to get out of marriages. Turner makes a sound argument, but an ultimately impossible one because he does not consider the reality of the state of 18th-century marriages.

 

Works Cited:

Porter, Roy. English Society in the Eighteenth Century. Second Ed. New York: Penguin. 1990. Print.

Turner, J. “A Discourse on Fornication: Showing the Greatness of that Sin; and Examining the Excuses pleaded for it, from the Examples of Ancient Times”.  London. 1698. 18thConnect. Web. Accessed April 2016.

A Discourse on Fornication

A Discourse on Fornication Analysis: The Dangers of Women

“A Discourse on Fornication shewing the greatness of that sin, and examining the excuses pleaded for it, from the examples of antient times” by John Turner is a piece written for men of John Turner’s parish outlining the sinfulness of fornication. Turner’s disapproval of fornication and adultery is evident as he condemns fornicators to a life of torment and hell. Turner develops three main arguments regarding the dismissal of fornication; that fornication is against God’s law of marriage, fornication is forbidden by the Bible, and fornication results in other sins. At the center of Turner’s focus lies the danger of women and their ability to lure even the holiest man into the realm of unholy adulterers. Turner’s “Discourse on Fornication” is a piece written for men stressing the dangers of women and their ability to seduce men into adultery.
John Turner, a lecturer of Christ Church in London, wrote “A Discourse on Fornication” at the request of the male members of his parish. The piece is founded on that fact that fornication, although popular with men and women at the time, results in sinfulness and a loss of God. This piece fits neatly within the eighteenth-century scope of male fears of women as bringers of sin and the sin caused by these women because Turner’s devotes countless pages teaching the men of his parish how to resist the sinfulness of women. Turner quotes a bible passage that says, “Keep thee from the Evil Women, from the Flattery of the Tongue of a strange Woman, Lust not after her Beauty in thine Heart, Neither let her take their with her Eye lids; for by means of a Whorish Woman a Man is brought to a Piece of Bread” (Turner, 46). This quote evokes a fear of women’s sexuality, physical beauty, and ability to corrupt holy men with their sinfulness. This passage takes the blame of fornication off of men and places it directly onto women. Turner’s argument is consistent with the argument of many men from the eighteenth century and, unfortunately, today, that women born of Eve are responsible for the fall of man and for all of man’s sins. Turner’s invocation of women as the bringers of sin, as well as a number of arguments about treacherous female prostitutes and concubines, attempts to teach his male audience about the importance of being on guard against women.

In Turner’s eyes, women are dangerous creatures who lead men into adulterous relationships against the Lord. Turner makes a few suggestions to the men in his parish on how to proceed with the temptations of women, saying:

Deliver thy self therefore from the strange Woman, even from the Stranger that flattereth with her Words, which forsaketh the Guide of her Youth, and forgetteth the Covenant of her God. For her House inclineth to Death, and her Paths unto the Dead. None that go unto her return again, neither take they hold of the Paths of Life. And especially, remember that Faith into which you have been baptiz’d; know what manner of Spirit you are of,* and consider the end of your Conversation.  Turner, 54

In this single passage, Turner equates women to fornication and fornication to death, therefore encouraging his male readers to fear women. Where does Turner’s fear of women originate? Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble touches upon the fact that society often excludes “those who fail to conform to unspoken normative requirements of the subject” (Butler, 6). The women Turner suggests lure men into adulterous relationships are the exact subjects Judith speaks of in her investigation of gender, sex, and desire. Women who participated in adultery do not fit into the traditional, Christian marriage norm Turner urges the men in his parish to seek. Turner fears women who engage in adultery because they do not fit the ideal Christian woman. During the eighteenth-century, women and their bodies were meant to be wholly operated and controlled by men, specifically, husbands. Women who engage in fornication suddenly have bodies with power, the power to ruin a holy man. Butler says, “this association of the body with the female works along magical relations of reciprocity whereby the female sex becomes restricted to its body, and the male body, fully disavowed, becomes, paradoxically, the incorporeal instrument of an ostensibly radical freedom” (Butler, 12). The women Turner fears have bodies that are fully disavowed and demonstrate the freedom associated with male bodies. These women are therefore threats to the societal norm Turner exists within, resulting in the extreme apprehension towards women demonstrated in Turner’s arguments against fornication. “A Discourse on Fornication” is a way for Turner to reconcile the fact that women demonstrate a sort of sexual freedom through fornication and, ultimately, have power that is regularly associated with men.

Work Cited
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 2006. Print.

Turner, John. “A Discourse on Fornication shewing the greatness of that sin, and examining the excuses pleaded for it, from the examples of antient times.” London. 1698. Print.

A Discourse on Fornication

A Discourse on Fornication Analytical Response

“A Discourse on Fornication” Response

John Turner’s 1698 text “A Discourse on Fornication” uses Biblical references to center its argument around Christianity and immoral sexual behavior. Similar to other texts regarding sexuality in the eighteenth century, “A Discourse on Fornication” focuses its attention on identifying the deviancy of sexual behavior. Turner goes as far as labeling sexual activity outside of the institution of marriage as an ultimate sin. The text creates its argument by comparing acts of men against God’s “Original Institution”, emphasizing that adultery and fornication violate the Christian ideals of good, and fornicators are refusing their chances at the pure and holy life.

The argument cements itself around the works of God and His approval: there is no discussion of societal assumptions of gender or sex, but an in-depth look at God’s proposed plan and man’s ability to follow his word. Turner blames man’s downfall on their ability to succumb to vice: “the looseness of men’s manners has corrupted their judgments, and defaced their sense of good evil”. Nothing can fall between, no one can be in a purgatory of morality: one is either good, or evil, and sexual deviance leaves you to the “humiliation of God”.

The language of the text is loaded with statements that emphasize patriarchal power structures. Turner speaks on the foul nature of adultery, “especially on the woman’s side, where there is a manifest injury to the whole family”. Women are not seen as their own, but as vehicles that carry their families and are therefore responsible for their moral uplift—or downfall.

Turner’s discourse places emphasis on traditional heterosexual institutions of marriage. It is reiterated through the text that man’s body is not his to own, but it is a possession of God, and one must conduct themselves through the principles of God. Women’s bodies are commodities under male possession and must give themselves to men and become “one flesh”. There is no idea of bodily autonomy; one’s body is not just theirs to own and conduct, but it is a “Servant of God” and must be used to carry out his deeds; bodies are not for individual pleasure, but for servicing those above you:

Christ was raised from the Dead, that he might raise us also to Immortality: and therefore we are bound not to live unto our selves, by giving up our Bodies to Pleasure in the Lusts of the Flesh; but to devote our selves to the Service of that Great God who made us, and to the Obedience of Christ, who died to expiate our Guilt.

Christian morals often center themselves around guilt and the duty of man to obey and service Christ. Man’s existence is validated by spreading the word of God and following the ‘right’ path. By using the Old Testament as the basis of his arguments, all of Turner’s points are his own reconstruction of biblical literature, and how he perceives God’s word: “We are commanded also to be Holy; and Holiness is expressly declared to be that qualification without which no Man shall see the Lord”. There is no salvation if there is no obedience.  Turner strongly emphasizes the evil of all vices, but the language surrounding sexuality places sexual activity in a negative light, deeming it impure and vile. The text stigmatizes sex and any sort of lustful behavior, referring to sexual activity as “vile affection”. Desire is viewed condition under strict religious rule—it is viewed as a problem, not a feeling.

Turner relates vice to uncleanliness; those who indulge their pleasures are not clean to the eyes of God and his disciples:

He becomes in every sence polluted and defiled.*Every other Sin that a Man doth is without the Body, but he that committeth Fornication sinneth against his own Body. The Prophane is injurious to God, and the Fraudulent to his Brother, and the Mischief of all other Sins falls first at a distance from ones self. But the Mischief of Fornication falls more immediately on the Offenders own Head; his own Body is debased in the very Trespass he has committed.

Those who succumb to sexual vices are “Harlots, Jezebels, and Whoremongers” who will be denied entrance to God’s kingdom. To sin against the body is to commit an ultimate crime: one is sinning against the gift that God has given you.

The article “A Discourse on Fornication” gave clear insights into the opinions on sexual deviancy during the eighteenth century. As noted in some of the texts we read for class, such as Trumbach and Harvey, the enlightenment was allowing for more leniency regarding the culture around sexuality, but the prevailing ideas of proper sexuality in Christian religions shaped popular notions of morality and created a discourse around sexuality that emphasized it as shameful behavior.

Works Cited

Butler, John. “A Discourse on Fornication”. London, 1698.