the Priest and Levite did wrong, or in other words, he was fully convinced, that there was an essential difference in the character and conduct of the Samaritan and the character and conduct of the Priest and Levite. And it is hard to conceive, that any man should read the parable, without receiving the same conviction and making the same acknowledgment. But many have denied the essential distinction between saints and sinners. Satan denied this distinction in respect to Job. He asked the Lord, "Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast thou not made an hedge about him and about his house and about all he hath on every side? but put forth thine hand now and touch all that he hath and he will curse thee to thy face." This was a plain insinuation, that Job did not differ essentially from sinners, notwithstanding all God had said in his favor. Satan also indirectly called the disinterested and supreme love of Christ to his Father in question, when he addressed a selfish motive to his mind to induce him to fall down and worship him. However, be that as it may, we know that not a few, who call themselves Christians, deny that there is any essential distinction between saints and sinners. Some deny this distinction one way and some another. Some deny it, by maintaining, that we ought not to love God, until we know that he loves us. Some deny it, by maintaining, that we ought not to love God more than ourselves. And some by maintaining, that God requires self love of us and that when we exercise self-love, we actually obey his commands. But if saints do not love God for what he is in himself; if they do not love him more than themselves and if they do obey him by exercising self-love, they do nothing more than others. Sinners love those, who love them, they love God for his favors; and they externally obey him from selfish motives. it is vain to deny and dispute the essential distinction between saints and sinners, which is kept up through the Bible and which cannot be denied, without denying that there are such persons as either saints

But

And if

or sinners, or any such thing as either sin or holiness. If sin does not consist in selfishness, it cannot exist in any thing else; for there is nothing else, that is morally evil or criminal. And if holiness does not consist in disinterested love, it cannot exist in any thing else; for there is nothing else that is morally excellent or virtuous. If there be any saints, they possess disinterested love and if there be any sinners, they are totally destitute of disinterested love. saints possess that disinterested love, of which sinners. are entirely destitute, then there is an essential and not merely an apparent and circumstantial distinction between them. And this essential distinction Christ meant to illustrate and did illustrate in a manner level to the lowest capacity. There is no man, who does not condemn selfishness, when he sees it in himself, or others; and there is no man but approves of disinterested love when he finds it in himself, or sees it in others.

5. We learn from what has been said, why the scripture represents good men as the excellent of the earth. It is because they possess that pure, holy and universal love in which all true holiness and moral excellence consists. They are as much more excellent than sinners, as benovolence is more excellent than selfishness. They are holy as God is holy, just as God is just, and merciful as God is merciful. They love God for the same reasons, that he loves himself. They love his friends with the same complacency, with which he loves them. And they love his enemies with the same benevolence, with which he loves them. They feel towards all creatures, objects and events, so far as their knowledge extends, as he feels. They love all the designs of God, so far as they are acquainted with them and desire to be instrumental in carrying them into execution. They have no interests but what they are willing should be made subservient to the higher interests of others, in which they take a sincere and peculiar pleasure. They are as much superior, in moral excellence, to those who seek their own interests supremely and solely, as they are different from them,

in their views, desires, and happiness. Was not Abet more excellent than Cain ? Were not Seth, Enoch and the patriarchs more excellent than those, who filled the earth with violence; Was not Moses more excellent than Pharaoh? Was not David more excellent than Saul? Was not Solomon more excellent than Jeroboam? Was not the Samaritan more excellent than the Priest and Levite ? In a word, if there be any benevolent men, are they not more excellent than those, who are entirely selfish? If this be true, then saints are certainly more excellent than sinners; and the representation, which the scripture gives of good men, in respect to moral excellence, is perfectly agreeable to the common sense of all mankind.

6. We learn from what has been said, that those, who are destitute of true benevolence to men, are equally destitute of true love to God. True love to God is precisely of the same nature as true love to men.--All true love to men is disinterested; and all true love to God is disinterested. True disinterested benevolence is always the first exercise of a new heart. It is difficult to conceive how a man can take complacency in benevolence before he has exercised benevolence and knows by experience how it feels.--God first sheds abroad the love of benevolence in the heart of a sinner and then the love of complacence. How often do those, who relate their experiences, tell us, that the first change they perceived in their minds, was the love of benevolence to every person they saw; and the love of complacence to all good men in particular; and then love to the goodness or benevolence of God, which shone in every person, creature and object around them. But though every convert may not ac curately distinguish the difference that actually existed in his first holy exercises; yet it is very certain, that his love of benevolence was prior to his love of complacence towards God. But whether the first exercises of the renewed heart follow one another in this order, or not, it is certain that those, who are destitute of true love to men, are destitute of true love to God. The apostle John has decided this point. "Whoso

cence.

hath this world's good and seeth his brother have need and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?" And again he says, "If any man say, I love God and hateth his brother, he is a liar: For he that loveth not his brother, whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen." The Priest and Levite were undoubtedly as destitute of love to God, as they were of love to the poor miserable object they saw, that ought to have excited their bowels of compassion and benefi. I know it has been said that love to men flows from love to God; but the truth is, love to God flows from love to men, or the love of complacence flows from the love of benevolence. Men are as proper and direct objects of benevolence, as God is the proper and direct object of complacence. He, therefore, who does not love his brother, whom he has seen and who is a proper object of benevolence, cannot love God whom he has not seen and who is the supreme object of complacence. Pure, disinterested, universal benevolence is a plain and infallible criterion, by which men determine whether they truly love God, or not. By this criterion, the Priest and Levite might have easily determined, that the love of God was not in their hearts; and by the same criterion the good Samaritan might have determined that his heart was right with God. And where is the person, that cannot understand this rule of trial and apply it and draw the just consequence from it?

may

If I should now ask every individual here present, which of these three men in the parable, thinkest thou acted the kind, friendly, benevolent, neighbourly part towards the man, that fell among the thieves. Every one would answer, the good Samaritan. Let me then urge you to go and do likewise. Every person you see or meet, whether rich or poor, high or low, good or bad, suffering or rejoicing, is a proper object of benevolence. God is good unto all and his tender mercies are over all his works; and you ought to be merciful as your Father in heaven is merciful. There are weigh

ty motives to live in the constant exercise of universal benevolence. This duty is enjoined by the law of love. The exercise of general benevolence tends to diffuse general happiness every where; in families, in neighborhoods, in parishes, in towns, countries and kingdoms. How happy would the world be, if all would feel and act like the good Samaritan? The same benevolent spirit would produce universal complacency towards God and cause all to rejoice in his character, in his laws and government. It would give every one good evidence, that he is walking in the straight and narrow path to eternal life; and it is the only way to obtain it, as Christ told the man, who desired to be directed in the only sure and certain way to heaven. And it is a perfectly easy way to obtain the favour of God and man and the enjoyment of all good. It was as easy for the Priest and Levite to exercise true benevolence, as for the Samaritan. And it is as easy for every man to exercise true benevolence, as it was for him who pitied & relieved the poor, wounded, suffering, hopeless man. Why will you not immediately go and do likewise? You can gain nothing by delaying, but may gain much by the immediate exercise of pure, universal benevolence. It will give you the purest and greatest present happiness. It will instantly give you that inward peace, which passeth all understanding. For it is more blessed to give than to receive. How pleasantly did the benevolent Samaritan go on his way after he had felt and expressed pure benevolence! Only do as he did and you shall be as happy as he was. Amen.