no reason for joining in the light and unseemly view, which is generally taken, of the holy state of matrimony. Nothing is more certain, than that it should be thought of reverently and entered into cautiously. Every thing which may lead to it should be carefully watched, and a guard set upon the thoughts, until the most careful measures have been taken to learn the true character of the suggested person. Such a course is by no means romantic or sentimental. But if it were adopted, and carried on even upon worldly principles, there would be fewer bigamies and fewer unhappy marriages.. At present marriage is a lottery; because nothing is done to make it otherwise. The plan said to have been adopted by some Christian sects, of marrying by the actual lot, is not more hazardous than a system which brings couples together, without any other knowledge of each other than can be gained in the frivolous intercourse of fashionable society, or in the more intimate intercourse of what is called courtship, when mercenary views, or a fancy, which may be a passing one, or the love of admiration or flattery, may produce a deception not always quite involuntary.

H. D. E.

THE CHRISTIAN LAW OF LOVE.

SOME years ago, a thoughtful and prudent layman of the Church requested us to write out some thoughts on THE CHRISTIAN LAW OF LOVE, as interpreted by the beloved Apostle; especially as set forth in St. John's First Epistle, iv., 20: "If a 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 following essay is the result of such poor efforts as we were able to make in answer to the aforesaid request. Not having any bet ter use for the matter, we have determined on submitting it in this shape to our readers, who of course will judge for themselves both how far the views are right, and also what is the proper bearing and application of them.

It is generally understood that St. John's Epistles were

written at Ephesus, near the close of the first century, with the immediate purpose of refuting the error, then and there prevailing, of the Gnostics, those rationalists and transcendentalists of ancient times. The Gnostics were so called from their professing to know more than others, and from the over weening conceit in which knowledge was held by them.

As knowledge is an individual gift or possession, so, from their fancied superiority in this, the Gnostics inferred that they were severally sufficient unto themselves, and thence drew a virtual dispensation from the bonds of Christian unity: they were to be saved not so much by the presence of GoD in His Church, as by the knowledge of GOD in their own minds And they professed to believe things, not on external testi mony or authority, but mainly as according with their inward sense; that is, they admitted no tests and measures of truth but the counsels of their private reason; historical documents, and matters of fact, and forms of doctrine being either rejected by them altogether, or else interpreted figuratively, so as not to hinder their dwelling aloft in pure spiritual and immaterial light. For instance, the resurrection from the dead they explained to be nothing more nor less than the rising of the soul into their pavilion of knowledge. And as their vision of Divine truth did not spring from nor rest upon the facts of Scripture, so neither did it issue, nor was it bound to issue, in acts of duty. And because they built their hopes upon knowledge, without the virtues that make up the body of obedience; that is, because while claiming to have the Christian's hope they did not study to rectify and purify their life; therefore the Apostle tells them,-"He that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as GOD is pure." From which it followed that this their claim was false: their neglecting the work of self purification proved that they had not the Christian's hope, but only some hope rooted in this world.

Such being their principies, the Gnostics of course owned no allegiance to any visible establishments or institutions of truth: their loyalty was all to their own opinions; and as these were ever advancing, any such external fixtures or settle inents would only operate as a bar to progress: they must be tied to no creeds, no forms, no Church, since these would stand

in the way of that unceasing perfectibility which was with them the only salubrious element of mind. On their ground, nothing was so important as truth, nor any thing true for them but their opinions: wherefore, to let the ligaments of brotherhood stand in competition with their opinions, had been disloyalty to the truth. Wrapped in the assurance that they had a paramount love of GOD, and that this was all-sufficient, they naturally felt themselves above the obligation of loving the brethren; and so they went out of the Church, and became a sect, or rather a multitude of sects; and, being subtle disputants and dialecticians, and skilled to make the worse appear the better cause, they seduced many to follow them, and thus brought about a great falling away from the faith. And because they put truth before love, knowledge before charity, therefore the Apostle charges that they have neither. And forasmuch as they pretended to love God while they manifestly did not love the brethren, nay, alleged that love as absolving them from the ties of brotherhood, the Apostle therefore calls them liars. The argument is briefly this: GoD's presence, as Himself had told them, was in societies of the faithful, in meetings of the brethren. Now, if they had really sought Him, they would have found Him there; and if, finding, they had truly loved Him, they would needs have loved the place also where they had found Him.

Such appears to have been the error which it was the immediate purpose of St. John's Epistles to refute and put down. The error was certainly extravagant enough; yet not so much so but that it has had a numerous posterity; and it is doubtful whether the race be wholly extinct even yet. There have always been, and perhaps ever will be, some who claim to be seeking CHRIST, or to have found Him, and who in the strength of that plea go out or keep out of the very place where He has taught them that He is to be found. Now, the doctrine of the Apostle seems clear enough, that we may not think of having such a love of GoD as will prompt or permit us to break unity and charity with one another if we love Him, we shall needs cleave to the living House where His presence dwelleth. Whether He may in any case be found elsewhere or not, is immaterial to the point in hand; it being

enough that the cutting one's self off from His membership infers such a state of mind as will not find Him anywhere: for indeed the doing thus evinces a pursuit, not of Him, but of somewhat else in His name, though the pursuer may not be aware of the fact. Nor can we be too carefully on our guard against entertaining any idea of such a love of GoD as can carry us above the ties of brotherly attachment, or supersede the knitting together of hearts in a common life. It is proper indeed that we have our opinions, provided we hold them soberly and modestly; but we should never forget that one of our greatest and most besetting dangers is, the having too many of them, or the making too much of them.

Such is the lesson to be gathered from St. John's Epistles, as viewed in reference to the special circumstances wherein they were written. And as such lessons are generally needful at all times, so are they especially now, when there is so strong a tendency even among Churchmen to set their particular views of the Church above the Church herself. "Not that I love the Church less, but that I love the truth more," is a fair specimen of the sophistries with which men often delude themselves into wrong thoughts, if not into wicked acts. For the conclusion is, that unless the Church do so and so, they will be obliged to leave her for the truth's sake. Such speeches ought not to be made, nor such thoughts entertained: it is tempting ourselves to say we have such an ardent love of GoD as threatens to burn asunder the golden thread that binds our hearts together. Not indeed but that there possibly may be causes to warrant a man in withdrawing from a particular branch of the Church, as there may be to justify a man in putting away his wife; but as in the one case no man is allowed, so in the other none should wish or dare to be his own judge.

The Church assuredly stands in a higher relation to us than to be postponed to any legislation of our individual minds. Our opinions, however innocent when rightly held, are nowhere set forth as means of grace; the SAVIOUR does not come to us in them; they are not among the appointments to which His presence is pledged; we cannot have His sacraments at their hands; they can nowise be a substitute for the body in which the living and life-giving current of His SPIRIT circulates in

a word, they can do nothing directly towards putting us in union or communication with Him, though they may do much twards separating us from Him. As we value our souls' health, let us never indulge the thought that these puny sprouts of the brain, which a warmer sun may cause to wither and die, to manure the upspringing of something better, that these may come in competition with the Vine into which we have been engrafted, and through which the sap of salvation is to flow into us.

Perhaps it should have been remarked before, that to hate our brother, and not to love our brother, are in the Apostle's use terms of the same meaning. And it is very considerable that love, in the Apostle's sense, is an active, fruit-bearing principle or power, not a fine feeling or sentiment, such as may spend its life in lip-blossoms; it is something that is and can be known only by deeds; whose very pulse is kind acts, charitable thoughts, whatsoever is just and fair and right; a doing unto others as we would have them do unto us; the whole being tempered with a spirit of forbearance, counsel, help, and comfort: in short, it is a loving, "not in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth." So that, if it be vain to say we love God when we do not love our brother, it is equally vain to say we love our brother when we do not cherish his society and fellowship his person. Such a love of the brethren as cracks the bond of peace and unity with them, on the plea of seeking their spiritual good, is no less a lie than the loving GOD so as to transcend or supersede the claims of fraternal attachment. Thus the true test and measure of all religious principles is, that they work out into practical beneficence, into such plain, home-bred, every-day virtues as knit and hold men together in communities and mutual regards. Here nothing passes off in such dreams, visions, raptures, and ecstacies which, being felt only by the individual having them, and requiring no organ but the tongue, are therefore apt to be turned into a dispensation from such good works as common sense is able to recognize and appreciate.

We have said that throughout his Epistles, generally, St. John has a special view to the cohesion of the flock, the constancy and fidelity of the brethren in their visible membership.