And who is my neighbour? They excluded from that character, heathens and Samaritans, and indeed all those of their own country who were unfriendly towards them; and so considered the command to love their neighbours, as allowing them to hate their enemies.

In opposing this sentiment, our Lord did not oppose the law; but merely the selfish gloss of the Rabbies; for the law did not allow of any such hatred as they cherished. Yet in comparing it with David's language in the Psalms, some Christian writers have seemed willing to concede, that the Jewish gloss was really founded upon the spirit of the Old Testament, and have represented the doctrine of love to enemies as peculiar to the gospel dispensation. That it is more clearly taught, and powerfully enforced, by our Saviour, than it had been before, is allowed; but the notion of his opposing his doctrine to that of Moses or David, is inadmissible; for this had been to destroy the law, and to render the New Testament at variance with the Old.

That good will to men, is both taught and exemplified in the Old Testament, is manifest from the joy expressed by David and the prophets, when predicting the conversion of the heathen. They even prayed, and taught their countrymen to pray, for the blessing of God upon themselves in subserviency to it. See Psal. Ixvii. Isa. xlix. Nor are the prayers of David against his enemies at variance with this principle. If they be, however, the New Testament is also at variance with it: for the same kind of lan is used in Paul's Epistles, as abounds in David's Paal ms. guage any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed.—Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works! Much confusion has arisen on these subjects, from not distinguishing between benevolence and complacency.

If

The one is due to all men, whatever be their character, so long as there is any possibility or hope of their becoming the friends of God the other is not, but requires to be founded on character The Old Testament writers, being under a dispensation distinguished by awful threatenings against sin, dwell mostly upon the latter; avowing their love to those who loved God, and their hatred to those who hated him: the New Testament writers, living under a VOL. VIII.

27

dispensation distinguished by its tender mercy to sinners, dwell mostly upon the former: but neither of these principles is inconsistent with the other. We may bear the utmost good will to men as the creatures of God, and as being within the limits of hope; while yet, considered as the Lord's enemies, we abhor them. If we love others as we love ourselves, that is all that is required: but the love which a Christian bears to his own soul is consistent with his abhorring himself as a sinner. Our Lord exemplified both these dispositions at the same time. In denouncing the damnation of hell against the scribes and pharisees, you would think him void of every feeling but that of inflexible justice: yet looking upon the same people, in reference to their approaching miseries, he burst into a flood of tears. The same spirit possessed the apostle Paul towards his countrymen. When they rejected the gospel, he did not scruple to apply to them the awful prophecies of Isaiah, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see and shall not perceive, &c. yet the same apostle solemnly declares, that he had great heaviness, and continual sorrow in his heart on their behalf. So far from an abhorence of the wicked in respect of their wickedness, being inconsistant with genuine benevolence, it is necessary to it, The compassion that is void of this, is not benevolence, but the workings of disaffection to God, and of criminal partiality towards his enemies.

Benevolence has not, as observed before, an immediate respect to character; yet it considers its objects within the limits of hope, in respect to their becoming the friends of God. If a creature be a confirmed enemy to God, as in the case of devils and lost souls, true benevolence will cease to mourn over them, as it would imply a reflection upon the Creator. It is on this principle that Aaron was forbidden to mourn for his sons, Nadab and Abihu, and that Samuel was reproved for mourning over Saul. Lev. x. 6. 1 Sam. xvi. 1. Hence also we see in the benevolence of David and Isaiah towards the heathen, (Psal. Ixvii. Isa. xlix.) a prospect of their future conversion and as this prospect was to be realized under the gospel dispensation, we perceive the reason of benevolence in it, arising to its highest pitch, By the appearance and sacrifice of

good

Christ, the glory of God was to be manifested in a way of will to men, even to enemies; angels therefore dwelt upon this idea at his birth, and the disciples were taught to cherish it.

But to bear good will to our enemies, to pity them that hate us, and to pray for them that despitefully use as and persecute us, is, after all, a strange doctrine in the account of a selfish world. If the love of God be not in us, self-love in one shape or other will have possession of our souls. Hence infidels have treated this precept as extravagant, and imputed the conduct of Christians to affectation. Conscious, it seems, that self-love is the governing principle of their own actions, they imagine it to be the same with all others. The general prevalence also of this spirit leads them to expect little else from one another, and to act as if it were a law of nature, for every one to love himself supremely, and all other beings only as they are subservient to him. Nor are infidels the only persons who have spoken and written in this strain: many of the advocates of Christianity have so formed their systems as to render self-love the foundation on which they rest. Neither God nor man is to be regarded but on our own account. On this prin ciple, however, it would follow, that there is no such thing as glorifying God as God, nor hating sin as sin, and that the gospel has no charms on account of its revealing mercy in a way of rightcousness, any more than if it had revealed it in a way of unrighteousness. If our love be directed merely " to that which relieves us," it would be equally worthy of acceptation in our account, let that relief come how it might; and thus the character of God as the JUST and the JUSTIFIER of them that believe in Jesus, forms no part of the good news to sinful men: the glory of the gospel is no glory.

There is much meaning in the words of the apostle John-We are or Gon: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of

GOD heareth not us.

spirit of error.

Hereby know we the spirit of truth and the Every false system of religion originates and terminates in self. This is the character of the spirit of error. But if we be of God, we shall love him, and every image of him in creation. Those objects which bear his moral image, such as his holy law, his glorious gospel, and his renewed people, will occupy

the first place in our esteem; and those which at present bear only his natural image, while there is any hope of their recovery to a right mind, will be the objects of our tender compassion, and their salvation the subject of our earnest prayers.

It is thus that we manifest ourselves to be the children of our Father who is in heaven; who, till sinners are fixed in a state of irreconcileable enmity to him, and to the general good, causeth his sun to rise, and his rain to descend upon them, whatever be their characters.

If self-love be the spring of our religion, it is declared by our Saviour to be of no value, and that it will issue in no divine reward. How should it be otherwise, when it differs not from the spirit of the world? The most abandoned men love those that love them. If this were true religion, we do not need to be taught it of God; for it is perfectly suited to our depraved nature. But if true religion consists in being of the mind of God, or in being perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect, it is absolutely necessary that we be born again, or we cannot see the kingdom of God.

ON ALMS-GIVING, AND PRAYER:

Mat. vi. 1-8.

OUR Saviour having detected various false glosses upon the law, and shown the spirituality of its requirements, proceeds to discourse on some of the most common and important duties of religion. Of

these he instances alms-giving and prayer, Three things are observable from what is said of the former, ver. 1—4.

First: It is taken for granted that the disciples of Christ were in the habit of giving alms; and this notwithstanding they generally consisted of persons who laboured for their subsistence. And would this bear to be taken for granted of the body of professors among us? They might have said, We have enough to do to provide for our own houses: it is for the rich, and not for labouring people, to give alms.' But feeling, as they did, for the afflicted and necessitous, especially for those of the household of faith, they would deny themselves many comforts for the sake of being able to relieve them. True religion always teaches men to be merciful.

Secondly: As, through the deceitfulness of the human heart, the most beneficial actions may arise from corrupt designs, and thereby be rendered not only void, but evil in the sight of God, we are warned as to our motives-Take heed that ye do not your alms BEFORE MEN, TO BE SEEN OF THEM-do not SOUND A TRUMPET before you, as the hypocrites do. In what concerns the relief of individuals, this counsel will commonly apply in the most literal sense of the words. The liberality of vain men, having no other object than to be thought generous, is commonly, either publicly proclaimed, or exercised in a way that shall by some means come to the knowledge of the neighbourhood; while that of the modest Christian, desirous only of approving himself to God, is done in secret. The words, however, do not apply in all cases. It is not so much the act as the principle or motive, that our Lord condemns. If we understand it literally of the former, it would follow, that nothing ought to be given in public subscriptions or collections for the poor; for in this, concealment would be improper, if not impossible. The primitive Christians did not always conceal their donations; but consulted, and subscribed for the poor brethren at Jerusalem, Acts xv. 29, 30. Nor would privacy be consistent with other commandments; particularly that in Chap. v. 16. Let your light so shine before men, that others seeing your good works, may glorify your Father which is in heaven. There is no evil in our works being seen of men,