vours received by one to whom they are absolutely neceffary, and by whom they are infinitely prized, muft naturally and neceffarily produce love. This will be reckoned a first principle, by every un-" prejudiced mind; and it is always supposed in the Holy Scriptures, where the faints are represented as under the habitual and powerful impreffion of love to God, for his love to them manifefted in their redemption. Thus fays the apostle Paul, "For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor "life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, 66 nor things prefent, nor things to come, nor

heighth, nor depth, nor any other creature, "fhall be able to separate us from the love of "God, which is in Chrift Jefus our Lord."

Now, is there any thing more neceffary to fhow, that those who believe and truft in the imputed righteousness of Christ must be holy in their lives, than their being under the influence of a fupreme love to God? Is not this the first and great commandment of the law," Thou fhalt love the "Lord thy God, with all thy heart, and with

all thy foul, and with all thy mind *?" Is not this a never-failing fource of univerfal obedience? as they love God, will they not love their brethren alfo the very worst of men, because they are the creatures of God; and the righteous more especially, because they are his faints, hist * Matt, xxii. 37.

chofen

chofen ones? Can they love God fupremely, and yet voluntarily displease him, breaking his commandments, or refifting his defigns? We know that love hath a quite different effect, in every other and inferior instance, endearing to us every thing related to the perfon who poffeffes our esteem and affection; how then can it be supposed so prepofterous in this single cafe, when it is fixed on the greateft, and the best of objects?

It is a received maxim, That there can be no true love, where there is not fome likeness and conformity of nature and difpofition to the ob ject beloved, and an endeavour after more. And this is a maxim that will in no cafe hold more infallibly, than in moral fubjects. It is impoffible that we can love purity, if ourfelves are impure; nay, it is even impoffible that we can understand it. Though an unholy perfon may have a very penetrating genius and capacity, may think acutely, and perhaps reason justly upon many, or most of the natural attributes of God, he can neither perceive nor admire his moral excellence. Inftead of perceiving the glory of God as infinitely holy, he hates, and fets himfelf to oppofe this part of his character, or to fubftitue fomething quite different in its room*. Or, if we can fuppofe

him

This is the true reafon why many fo warmly oppofe God's vindictive justice, and that in the face of many awful examples

him able, or from any particular reafon inclined, to tell the truth, as to what God is, he can never difcern or feel his glory or beauty in being such. For why, he himself is unholy; that is to fay, in other words, he fupremly loves, and hath his affections habitually fixed upon fomething that is not God, fomething that is contrary to God's nature, and a breach of his law.

Let us continue to reflect a few moments upon this fubject, which is of great importance, varying a little the light in which it is viewed. Let us consider what is meant by a fupreme and superlative love to God. These words muft have a meaning. It is not a fupreme love of a certain nature, or perfon, called God, whom no man hath feen, and of whom we know no more but the name. In this cafe the old maxim would hold, "Ignoti nulla cupido;" there can be no affection, of either love or hatred, towards an object wholly unknown. A fupreme love of God therefore, where it really hath place in any heart,

of it, even in the prefent partial and imperfect dispensation. That there are many marks of God's displeasure against fin, even in that part of his government which is at prefent fubjected to our view, and also diftinct warnings of a ftricter reckoning to come, I should think, might be, to an impartial perfon, paft all doubt: and yet, this is derided and denied by many, merely because they can never think that a perfection in the Divine Nature, for which they have no love or esteem in their own hearts. All who love God, then, must be like him; and even those who will not be what he really is, are always ftrongly inclined, at leaft, to fuppofe him what they themselves are.

mult

must mean the love of a character in fome meafure understood, though not fully comprehended. In short, according to the Scriptures, it is a fupreme love of the fource and pattern of moral excellence, of a Being of infinite holiness and purity, with whom "evil cannot dwell." Is not this, in truth and reality, the love of holinefs itself, the fupreme love of it? Can we love holiness then, and not aspire after it? can we love it, and not endeavour to practife it? nay, can we love it, and not poffefs it? can we love holiness fupremely, and live in fin habitually? it is the groffeft contradiction, the most abfolute impoffibility. There is then a diametrical oppofition between the love of God, and the fervice of fin. To fuppofe them confiftent, would be fuppofing, that the tendency of the heart and affections might be oppofite to the course of the life, or fupremely fixed upon two things mutually deftructive of each other; on the contrary, our Saviour juftly affirms, That "no man can serve "two masters; for either he will hate the one, "and love the other; or else he will hold to the 46 one, and despise the other. Ye cannot ferve "God and mammon *."

Once more, Is not the love of God, I mean, the fupreme love of God, precifely what is meant by holiness? It is not only an evidence of it, not

only a fource of it, not only an important branch, but the fum and perfection of it. For what is fin in the heart, of which all evil actions are but the fruits and expreffions, and from which they derive their malignity and contrariety to the divine will? Is it not the love and purfuit of inferior objects on their own account, and giving them that place in our affections which is due only to God? All fins, of whatever kind, may be easily reduced to this, and fhown to be nothing else, but the alienation and estrangement of our heart and affections from God, to whom alone they are due; which, fo far as it prevails, neceffarily occafions a mifapplication of every faculty of our minds, and of every member of our bodies, and thus a rebellion of the whole man. But whoever loves God above all, and places his chief happiness and delight in him, is truly holy; not only will be fo as the effect, but really is fo, by the poffeffion of this difpofition. In proportion as this love is increafed and ftrengthened, his fan&ification is carried on; and when it is compleat and triumphant, entirely free from the mixture of any bafer paffion, he is perfect in holiness.

It may probably occur to fome readers, that this reafoning will not accord with the accounts given by many moderns of the nature and foundation of virtue. Some found it upon the pre

fent