may be carried on to perfection, without our becoming too sensitive to the sufferings of the world. There is a mighty power in this sentiment to subtract the bitterness of grief which would pierce the feeling and tender soul in view of the miseries and misfortunes of life. That power lies in the great truth which it teaches, that all evil and suffering shall result in good; that God, under the wise administration of his government, will make the whole mysterious scene, of discord and suffering, terminate in harmony and joy.

Now we can witness, and even endure, the most acute sufferings with real resignation, when we have the assurance that they will secure a blessing which will far outweigh the suffering. We can see our friends under the operation of medicine, which, while it is taking hold of the system, fills it with pain, or we can behold the amputation of a diseased limb, when life is to be preserved and health restored,— can endure it all ourselves, with real resigination, and even satisfaction, in view of the desirable end to be secured. But take away the hope of the desirable end, and we can neither endure to witness nor to experience the pain.

-we

Here, then, is the power that sustains the kind and tenderhearted, and gives them opportunity to improve upon these noble principles of their nature, without ever becoming too sensitive to human misery. Though at times they may be compelled to burst into a flood of tears, and feel the heart pierced to the very centre, yet there is an antidote in the gospel, and a balm, there that dries the tears, heals the wound, and administers a cordial which is the very water of life. It is the assurance that all this dark scene shall be changed to light, and life, and joy unutterable and unending. The kind and benevolent Jesus, as he gazed upon the illfated city of Jerusalem, wept over its doomed inhabitants. But what unutterable joy must have succeeded his weeping, as the thought came home to him that they should finally say,"Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." How was all thought of their suffering dissipated and forgotten, in view of that bright prospect, when "the ransomed of the Lord shall return and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads, and sorrow and sighing flee away." St. Paul says, "I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us Why? "Because the creature [the creation] itself shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God."

Here, then, is the great field for the cultivation of the noblest feelings which can be made to stir in human souls. Here they can be cultivated without any fear that they will be blighted or frozen by the mildews and frosts of a false theology.

DOES GOD LOVE ALL MEN, IRRESPECTIVE OF CHARACTER?

BY REV. L. C. TODD.

OUR Partialist brethren often speak a language which implies that our heavenly Father loves good men more than the wicked. On the other hand, we sometimes hear Universalists use expressions which imply that the divine love has no reference to moral distinctions whatever. Let us try, then, to find the truth of the case. And we need not be surprised, if, as in most cases of dispute, we find them both partly right and partly wrong. It appears to be a plain matter of fact that he did love mankind, in some sense, when they were sinners. And by reason of this love did institute the means of delivering them from the thraldom of sin. Had not this been the case, he would have done nothing for the improvement of their condition. And John says, "We love him because he first loved us." And Paul speaks of his "great love, wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins.' The Bible abundantly teaches that God's love to us is prior to our reformation and obedience; and that it is universal and everlasting, embracing all sinners, the whole human race. On this ground I once heard it declared in the pulpit that God loved the Pirate Gibbs, in his deepest crimes, as much as he ever loved Jesus Christ! I regretted to hear the expression, because I think it wrong both in theory and in its practical influence. Should the world believe that God loves the worst as much as the best, in the fullest sense of the term, how natural the inference that he makes no distinctions of character,—that with him moral virtue has no preference and no reward, and that all such distinctions and preferences among us are arbitrary and incompatible with Christianity.

وو

2. I do not like such extremes. Let us seek a solution of the difficulty. The term Love seemsto be vague, like other words, and used in different senses. The love of our offspring, conjugal love, fraternal love, and social love are all different exercises of mind, and designed to adapt us to our domestic and social relations. This, for the sake of distinction, I will call the love of attachment. These modifications of love all imply personal attachment, and are always founded upon some real or supposed qualities in the objects loved. This love, which implies personal attachment, is necessarily proportioned to the real or supposed qualities of its object, and depends on them for its existence. It is the love of attachment which we are required to exercise toward the Supreme Being. We are required to love him because he is good, to love him supremely because he is supremely good. But if the love of attachment is not to be in proportion to the qualities of its object, we might as reasonably be required to love the devil (supposing his personal entity) supremely, as to be required to love the Almighty!

might as well be required to love sin as holiness. If God exercises the love of attachment irrespective of moral worth and moral qualities, then we ought to do so too; and we should love the devil as much as himself. And if God loves the Pirate Gibbs, or any other criminal, as much as Jesus Christ, then we should love him, or any other loathsome and polluted criminal as much as we should love the Saviour! If we are to love things independent of their moral qualities, then we are not only to love all criminals as much as good men, but to love their crimes too, and of course be assimilated to them, as it is natural to imitate what we love.

3. The principle will not do. It conflicts with theology, with ethics, with the laws of nature, and with all we know of God. That omniscient and all-perfect Being must comprehend the qualities and moral worth of every object. And his love of attachment, founded upon that knowledge, must be exactly according to the moral qualities or worth of each individual. In other words, he is attached to each individual in exact conformity to that individual's character and worth. In this sense of the term, it seems impossible for God to love anything that is not good. Suppose a being "totally depraved," so bad that there is no good in him,-nothing valuable, nothing lovely, then there would be nothing in him for a good being to love. Everything in him would then be repugnant to everything in a good being. God could never love such a being, because there would be nothing in

him but opposition to goodness; and he could not design to save him because there would be nothing in him worth saving, or that would be good for anything when saved. But all criminals have much in them that is good. The nature which God gave them is good; and what is good may be saved from its pollutions and improved.

4. We will now consider another modification or sense of the term Love. This is a kind which implies no personal attachment, and may be exercised independently of all considerations of merit, quality, or worth in its object. It may flow out in great strength and depth towards objects for whom we have no attachment whatever, but even a sort of loathing and abhorrence. Suppose I see a hideous snake writhing in the fire,—I have no attachment to the reptile at all,—I wish bim annihilated,-yet the sight of its agony excites in me a strong and tender sympathy, and an ardent desire to relieve its sufferings. This I will call the love of benevolence. This love may be exercised by a good being toward all beings that live, however depraved or worthless they may be. We cannot feel attached to men only so far as they manifest something in harmony with our own moral sense and feelings; but we may exercise a benevolent desire to relieve their sufferings and promote their good. We cannot love the enmity of our enemies, nor feel attached to them any farther than we perceive in them something attractive; but we may cover them with the shield of benevolence, and encircle them with the kindness of our philanthropy. This spirit of kindness, which forbids us to hurt, and inclines us to bless even where we cannot approve, is the moral essence of Christianity. It enlarges and assimilates the soul to God, without violence to its nature, and in harmony with the laws of its constitution. This love of benevolence in the Deity would forbid the infliction of ceaseless torments upon the meanest thing that lives; and would move forward toward the accomplishment of the greatest and most extensive good, yet it would not imply that the Almighty is affectionately attached to any being any farther than it is good or like him. Our conclusion is, that God is in some sense attached to all moral intelligent beings exactly in proportion to their individual worth, moral qualities, and degree of assimilation to himself. And, at the same time, his benevolence, which is the essence of his moral nature, is independent of the character or worth of his creatures; and is as universal and unchanging as himself; and its triumphs shall be boundless and eternal. So far as the feeling of attachment is concern

ed, we may say, therefore, that God does not approbate all men alike, but he loves, in this sense, all according to their moral worth and advancement toward him; while his own unchanging attribute of benevolence flows out to all, like the solar orb pouring its eternal beams upon all beings and worlds. And as men may deprive themselves of the sun's rays by getting into the shade, or into the dens of the earth, so they may disqualify themselves for the enjoyment of the rays of the great moral Sun, by covering themselves with the stains of sin and the dark shades of guilt.

THE RETURN TO LIFE.

BY MRS. NANCY T. MUNROE.

THE morning sun shone brightly,
Where a young sleeper lay,
The morning breeze stirred lightly
Her tresses, in their play.
But sighs and sounds of weeping,
Were heard around her bed,
And stricken hearts were keeping
Their watch above the dead.

And low, soft words were spoken,
Within that silent room,
And hearts were well nigh broken,
That decked her for the tomb.
Pale roses wreathed her forehead,
And lay upon her breest,
And those who fondly sorrowed,
Now left her to her rest.

And to that chamber lonely,
Where that young sleeper lay,
The mother cometh only

To gaze, and weep, and pray.
'Tis night, the mother sleepeth,
Her last sad watch is done,
For God's own angel keepeth
Watch o'er her infant one.

Morn broke, the light came straying
Upon that fair child's brow,
Her tiny hands were playing

With those pale roses now.