or possible, will be loved more, and the smaller happiness less. This also is inherent in the very nature of the affection. If the mind delight in happiness, it follows necessarily that this delight must increase as the object of it increases. For example; if it delight in the happiness of one being, it will equally delight in the same happiness of a second; in the same manner in that of a third; of a fourth, a fifth, a sixth, and so on, in that of any given or supposable number. Or, should we suppose one of these beings to be happy in any given degree, and that happiness doubled, tripled, quadrupled, or increased in any other degree, the delight of such a mind in this object would be increased in the same proportion. I do not here intend that this affection will operate with the mathematical exactness here stated. I am well aware that such minds as ours are utterly incapable of operating with their affections in this perfect manner. This mode of illustration has been here used for the sake of exhibiting the general proposition in a manner clear and decisive, and, if I mistake not, it unanswerably evinces the truth of the proposition.

In entire accordance with this doctrine we are commanded to love God with all the heart,' not only as an object of our complacency, but of our benevolence also. We are not only required to approve of his perfect character, but also to delight in his perfect happiness, or, as we more usually term it, blessedness. His perfect character is the cause of which his perfect happiness is the effect. The former it is our duty to regard with supreme complacency, the latter it is equally our duty to regard with supreme benevolence.

No less accordant with this disposition, also, is the second command of the same law. Our neighbour,' that is, any and every individual of the human race is the subject of the same happiness as ourselves. We are therefore required to 'love our neighbour as ourselves' viz. because his happiness is of the same importance as our own; not indeed mathematically, but generally and indefinitely, as the words of the command import.

It is to be observed here, that benevolence is the only object of this command. The greater part of those who are included here, under the word neighbour,' are wholly destitute of virtue in the evangelical sense. But towards any and all

VOL. III.

112

I. I sle

love.

1. Th

in oth..

pabl

possible to exercise complacer.sy:

than the love of such virtue. terested.

us be allowed, this follows of course. a than that the mind which loves hap

in proportion to the degree in which varse be disinterested. In other words, it partiality for its own enjoyment, or any at of others. Its delight in the happiness A will be the same with that which it finds in cat; so far as it is able to understand and reasame manner. We cannot, I acknowledge, ei

dor feel the concerns of others in the same Crown; and from this imperfection would arise, Cubenevolence were perfect, a difference in our esti..nese objects, which so far as I see could not be

But in cases not affected by this imperfect state ds, cases which even in this world are numerous, od can in my view be alleged why the estimation d not be the same. In a more perfect state of being obable the number of such cases may be so enlarged comprehend almost all the interests of intelligent crea

This love is an active principle.

By this I intend, that in its nature it controls all the faculics in such a manner as to engage them supremely in the pomotion of the great object in which it delights. Of this auth we have the most abundant proof in the scriptural exhibitions of the character of God, of the Redeemer, and of those saints whose history they record. 'God,' saith St John,

i love. Every good gift,' saith St. James, and every perfoot gift, is from above; and cometh down from the Father of lights. Nevertheless,' saith St. Paul, he left himself not without witness; in that he did good, giving us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.' Thou art good,' says David, and dost good; and thy tender mercies are over all thy works.' 'Jesus Christ,' Mays St. Peter, a man who went about doing good.' It is hardly necessary to observe, that the whole body of worthes presented to us in the Scriptures were in this respect' follow

of God, as dear children;' or that the same mind' was

in them, which was also in Christ.' The Epistle of St. Paul particularly, and his whole history after his conversion, as given to us by St. Luke, are one continued proof that this was his ruling character. The love which exists in word, and in tongue,' the Scriptures reprobate, and approve and enjoy that only which, in their emphatical language, exists in deed and truth.' We hardly need, however, look to this or any source for evidence concerning this subject. Love in all cases, so far as our experience extends, prompts him in whom it exists to promote the happiness of the object beloved. So plain is this to the eye of common sense, that no person believes love to exist in any mind, which does not labour to accomplish happiness for the object which it professes to love. Thus a parent who neglects the happiness of his children is universally pronounced not to love them; and thus persons professing friendship for others, and inattentive at the same time to their welfare, are with a single voice declared to be friends in pretence merely. What is true in this respect of these natural affections, is altogether true of evangelical love. Its proper character is to do good as it has opportunity.

6. This principle is the only voluntary cause of happiness. The benevolence of intelligent creatures is the same in 'kind with the benevolence of God; and for this reason is styled the image of God.' But the benevolence of God is the single original cause, the sole as well as boundless source of all the happiness found in the creation. In the great design of producing this happiness he has required intelligent creatures to co-operate with himself. Of their labours to this end their own benevolence is the only immediate cause. Benevolence therefore, in God and his intelligent creatures, considered as one united principle of action, is the only voluntary source of happiness in the universe. As therefore none but voluntary beings can produce nor even contrive happiness, and as no voluntary beings except benevolent ones are active to this end, it is plain that happiness is ultimately derived from benevolence alone, and but for its exertions would never have existed.

7. This principle is one.

By this I intend that the same love is exercised by a virtuous mind towards God, towards its fellow creatures, and towards itself. The affection is one. The difference in its ex

Love

ercises springs only from the difference of its objects. is the fulfilling of the law; that is, one affection, exercised towards God and towards man, is alternately the fulfilling both of the first and second commands. He who is the subject of one of these exercises is of course a subject of the other also. He who loves God loves mankind; he who loves mankind loves God. There are not two affections of the mind, in the strict and metaphysical sense, one of which is called love to God, or piety, and the other love to mankind, or benevo lence but there is one love, now exercised toward God, and now toward mankind.

II. I shall now proceed to prove the existence of this principle.

The evidence which I shall adduce for this purpose will be derived,

1. From the Scriptures.

2. From reason.

The first argument which I shall allege from the Scriptures is the moral law; Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart; and thy neighbour as thyself.

I have already observed that benevolence, or love to happiness, or to intelligent beings as capable of happiness, is the object and the only object of the second of these commands. Should any doubt remain on this subject, it may easily be removed by the consideration that our Saviour has taught us to consider our enemies universally as included under the word

neighbour.' The enemies of a good man, knowing him to be such, are always wicked men; and, having no holiness or evangelical virtue cannot, in the physical sense, be loved with complacency, or the love of virtue. The love of happiness therefore, or benevolence, is the principle especially if not not only enjoined in this law. Accordingly, our Saviour called the command, enjoining 'brotherly love,' that is, the love of his disciples toward each other, or, in other words, complacency, a new commandment.'

As the moral law then enjoins especially the love of happiness, that is, benevolence, so it evidently enjoins this disposition in a proportion corresponding with that which has been insisted on in this Discourse. We are required in it to 'love God with all the heart; and our neighbour as ourselves. In

other words, we are required to exercise this love proportionally to the importance or greatness of the object loved: supremely towards that object which is supremely great and important, and equally towards those objects whose importance is equal.

With this view of the law perfectly accords our Saviour's practical comment on the second command: Whatever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.' In this command our own equitable wishes for good to be done to ourselves, are made the measure of the good which we are bound to do them.

(2.) As another proof, I allege Luke vi. 32, 33, 35; ' For if ye love them that love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. But love ye your enemies; and do good and lend, hoping for nothing again: aud your reward shall be great; and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind to the unthankful and to the evil.'

Se

In these declarations of our Saviour it is manifest, first, that the love which he enjoins, is disinterested love; for it is productive of beneficence without reference to a reward. condly; we learn from them, that even this is not sufficient to constitute the disinterestedness of the Gospel: it is still further required, that the benevolence shall operate towards enemies, overcoming all hostility towards those, who hate us; requiring us, instead of being enemies, to become friends to our enemies; to render good for their evil, and blessing for their cursing. Unless we do this, we are elsewhere informed in the Gospel, that we are not and cannot be the children of our Father, who is in heaven.' Thirdly; we are taught that the disposition with which we do good to others for the sake of gaining good at their hands, or the spirit with which we do good merely to those who do good to us, that is, selfishness in its fairest and most reputable form, neither merits nor will receive a reward, and is only the spirit of 'publicans and sinners.'

(3.) I allege as

tle. 1 Cor. xiii. 5,

another proof the declaration of the aposLove seeketh not her own.'

In this declaration St. Paul has asserted the disinterestedness of evangelical love, not only in the most explicit manner,