secure our salvation. How they who maintain, that we are esteemed innocent and righteous before God, on account of a certain quality in our minds called faith, and not for our actions, can reconcile that position with the unequivocal superiority which the text assigns to charity (which I shall shew to be a practical principle, demonstrable only by our actions) over faith, I profess not to know. But I think their difficulty in so doing will be not a little encreased, when they consider that it is the very same Apostle upon whom they principally, if not entirely rely for the support of their doctrine, who has (as I contend) in this admirable chapter furnished us with a complete refutation of it. It is not, however, my present purpose to discuss this topic, important as I at all times deem it to be; but merely to give an exposition of the text, with such practical inferences as will naturally result from it.

In the preceding chapter, St. Paul had discoursed at large to his Corinthian converts, upon the different orders and functions of different men in the infant Church, whether arising from spiritual gifts miraculously imparted to them, or from qualifications naturally

possessed or acquired. This it should seem he did with a view to allay certain jealousies which existed amongst them, about the precedency due to their respective ranks. Having explained to them, by aptly comparing the Church of Christ to the human body, the absolute necessity for a great variety and subordination of members, and the impossibility that all should be of equal value and dignity, he exhorts them nevertheless to covet earnestly the best gifts—that is, of prophecy, of miracles, of healing, of tongues, and some others, by which they might become more eminently serviceable to their brethren, and advance the great cause which he had so much at heart. But yet, he adds—that he will shew unto them a more excellent way to accomplish that object. And he then proceeds in the chapter before us, to describe very particularly, and to analyse as it were the properties of that charity, which he affirms in the text to be greater than faith or hope, and consequently than any other Christian virtue that can be mentioned.

From a consideration of the various qualities both negative and positive, which the Apostle has enumerated as belonging to

-

charity, an able writer of our Church has not improperly defined it to be "that affection of the mind, whereby we love God for his own sake, and our neighbour for God's sake'." That is it consists in the observance of those two commandments, namely, the love of God and of our neighbour; upon which our Saviour has assured us, depend all the law and the prophets. But practically speaking, these two commandments resolve themselves into one. We have no means of shewing our love to God, but by displaying that feeling towards our fellow-creatures. He is wholly inaccessible to us but through the medium of prayer and praise. But however regularly and fervently we may offer him these external tributes of devotion, they must be deficient in sincerity, and consequently worthless, if they are unaccompanied by benevolent sentiments and kind actions towards each other. By this shall all men know that ye are my Disciples, (said Jesus) if ye have love one to another.If a man say, I love God, (says St. John) and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he

'Dean Stanhope, as quoted in D'Oyly and Mant's Bible.

that loveth not his brother, whom he hath seen, how can he love God, whom he hath not seen? According to which, it appears that almost all the properties of love or charity mentioned by the Apostle, belong more especially to the love of our neighbour. And because the most obvious, the most general, and the most convenient mode of testifying that love, is by rendering him pecuniary service, the term charity has long been used as equivalent to alms-giving. And as words have great influence over both our thoughts and actions, this has led to very serious and extensive errors. Many persons appear to think, that to give money is all that is necessary to be charitable. And others, perceiving this not to be true, go into the opposite extreme, and think that it is no part of charity at all. Even very good writers sometimes incautiously express themselves, so as to give some countenance to this opinion: by affirming, when commenting upon this very chapter, that "the grace here so highly recommended, consists, not in any outward acts, but in the inward disposition of the heart and that those acts are no farther of any value, than as they proceed from, and are sanctified by,

this disposition." The latter part of this sentence is indeed true: but the former part appears to be laid down much too broadly: and would naturally lead a selfish and avaricious man to think, that provided he bestowed his pity upon the distressed, did not insult their poverty, nor grossly outrage their feelings he was guilty of no breach of Christian charity. Such a man might console himself with the reflection, that his conduct was not at variance with many particulars of the doctrine of the Apostle. That his charity (for instance) was of a kind that envied notvaunted not itself—was not puffed up, did not behave itself unseemly, was not easily provoked—thought no evil―rejoiced not in iniquity-but rejoiced in the truth. All this he might fairly say-but still if he was not kind-if he bestowed none of his goods to feed the poor-or so much of them only as bore no proportion to his ability or his superfluity-his conscience, if it was not utterly dead, must tell him that he was deficient in the most essential part of the virtue under our consideration.

Will it be said, that this is an imaginary character? If I thought so, I am sure that I