which is a general Law of Love extending to all Points. There is nothing hard in this Sense, nothing but what any Man may fee the Reason of: For certainly to injure our Neighbour in any way makes us guilty of the Breach of the Law, which commands us to love our Neighbour; for one injurious Action is as inconsistent with Love as another; and in this respect injurious Actions have no Difference, for they are all equally inconfiftent with the Great

Law.

The giving Light to this Passage in St. James has not misled us from the main Purpose of this Discourse; for we have feen at the fame time the true Extent and Meaning of the Text, with respect to one of the Laws referred to in it, and which is eafily applicable to the other. St. James has fully taught us our Saviour's Meaning, when he said, On these two Commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.

But let us turn to confider the other general Head referred to by our Saviour in the Text, namely, the Love of God. This, says our Lord in the thirty-eighth Verse, is the first and great Commandment. From this Head are to be deduced all the Service, Worship, and Honour, which we owe and pay

1

to our Creator. I observed to you before, that all the Duties of Religion are relative : Which is true in that Part now under Confideration; for the Duties we owe to God are founded in the Relation between God and us. Were there no such Relation, the Perfections of God might be Matter of Admiration, but could not be the Ground of Duty and Obedience. I observed likewife to you, that Love naturally transforms itself into all relative Duties, which arife from the Circumftances of the Persons related. Thus, in the present Cafe, if we love God, and confider him as the Lord and Governor of the World, our Love will foon become Obedience: If we consider him as wife, good, and gracious, our Love will become Honour and Adoration: If we add to these our own natural Weakness and Infirmity, Love will teach us Dependence, and prompt us in all our Wants to fly for Refuge to our great Protector: And thus in all other Instances may the particular Duties be drawn from this general Principle. Prayer and Praise, and other Parts of Divine Worship, which are the Acts of these Duties, are so clearly connected to them, that there is no need of shewing distinctly concerning them, how they flow from this general Commandment.

VOL. I.

Aa

Having

t

Having thus given you an Account of the Text with respect to both the Principles of Religion referred to in it, the Love of God, and the Love of our Neighbour, I would now, in the second Place, lay before you some Observations which seem to arise naturally from the whole.

The first is, That these two Principles, from which our Lord tells us all Religion flows, must be consistent with one another; otherwise they could not both be Principles of the fame Religion. The Love of God therefore can in no Case oblige us to act contrary to the Love of our Neighbour. Our Saviour has told us indeed, that the Time would be, when some should think they did God good Service by deftroying their Brethren: But I don't find the Religion or the Zeal of those Persons much commended; but this very Character is given of them to shew how little they knew or understood their Duty. And yet, could fuch a Cafe ever happen, in which it might become our Duty to hurt our Neighbour, in order to promote the Honour of God, it could not be a just Character of false Zeal, to say that it made Men think they did God good Service by destroying or abusing their Neighbour; because, upon this Supposition, it might happen

2

happen to be the Character of true religious

Zeal.

There is one Thing in our Saviour's Argument which may perhaps mislead Men in judging upon this Cafe, and which therefore may deserve to be particularly confidered. Of the Love of God our Saviour says, it is the First and Great Commandment: The Love of our Neighbour he styles the Second, like unto it. Now from hence perhaps it may be inferred, That the Love of God, which is the First and Great Commandment, is a Law of a fuperior Obligation to that which is only the Second, and may therefore in some Instances controul and over-rule it. From whence it would follow, That we might lawfully overlook the Love of our Neighbour, in obedience to the superior Obligation we are under to love God. Now, upon supposition that our Duty to God and our Neighbour could ever interfere, I should readily allow that we ought to love God rather than Man: But our Saviour's saying the Love of God is the First Commandment, is no manner of Reason to think that it ever is, or can be, inconsistent with the Second.

The Love of God is properly styled the First Commandment, in respect to God who is the Object of the Love, and because it is indeed

Aa2

indeed the Foundation of all Religion, even of that Commandment which is styled the Second. But this is so far from shewing that the Love of God may ever clash with the Love of our Neighbour, that it proves the contrary; for, if the Love of our Neighbour is deducible from the Love of God, it must ever be consistent with it.

I know very well that the antient Writers of Morality have not gone higher for Principles to build their Precepts on, than to the common Defires of Nature, and the several Relations of Man to Man: But that is their Fault; for they might have looked farther with very good Success: For, if we confider God as the common Father of Mankind, and (as from his Goodness and Impartiality we must needs judge) equally concerned for the Welfare of all his Children, we shall have a very fure Foundation for all the moral Duties. No Man, who thinks himself bound to love and obey God, can think himself at liberty to hurt or oppress those whom God has taken under his Care and Protection: No Man, who believes it his Interest as well as his Duty to please God, but must likewife believe it his Interest and Duty to be kind and tender towards those who are the

Children of God, and in whose Happiness