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 inconfiftent with Love as another; and in this refpect injurious Actions have no Difference, for they are all equally inconfiftent with the Great Law.

The giving Light to this Paffage in St. James has not milled us from the main Purpose of this Discourse; for we have seen 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 faid, On these two Commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.

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

to our Creator. I obferved 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 fuch Relation, the Perfections of God might be Matter of Admiration, but could not be the Ground of Duty and Obedience. I obferved likewise to you, that Love naturally transforms itself into all relative Duties, which arise from the Circumftances of the Perfons 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 confider 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.

A a

Having

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 fecond Place, lay before you fome Obfervations which feem to arife naturally from the whole.

The first is, That these two Principles, from which our Lord tells us all Religion flows, must be confiftent with one another; otherwise they could not both be Principles of the fame Religion. The Love of God therefore can in no Cafe oblige us to act contrary to the Love of our Neighbour. Our Saviour has told us indeed, that the Time would be, when fome should think they did God good Service by deftroying their Brethren: But I don't find the Religion or the Zeal of thofe Perfons much commended; but this very Character is given of them to fhew how little they knew or underftood their Duty. And yet, could such 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 juft. Character of false Zeal, to say that it made Men think they did God good Service by destroying or abufing their Neighbour; becaufe, upon this Suppofition, it might

2

happen

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 fays, it is the First and Great Commandment: The Love of our Neighbour he ftyles 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 fome Inftances controul and over-rule it.

From

whence it would follow, That we might lawfully overlook the Love of our Neighbour, in obedience to the fuperior Obligation we are under to love God. Now, upon fuppofition 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 faying the Love of God is the Firft Commandment, is no manner of Reafon to think that it ever is, or can be, inconfiftent with the Second.

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

A a 2

indeed the Foundation of all Religion, even of that Commandment which is styled the Second. But this is fo far from fhewing 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 confiftent 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 feveral Relations of Man to Man: But that is their Fault; for they might have looked farther with very good Succefs: 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 fhall 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 opprefs those whom God has taken under his Care and Protection: No Man, who believes it his Intereft as well as his Duty to please God, but must likewife believe it his Intereft and Duty to be kind and tender towards thofe who are the Children of God, and in whofe Happiness