CHAPTER XXIV. LOVE TO GOD AND LOVE TO MAN.

In a former chapter we have noticed the analysis of the principle of _love_. It is needful to refer to this again, as intimately connected with the question of the right moral action of finite minds.

We have seen that love is a complex exercise, its first element being agreeable emotions in view of certain qualities and actions. Combined with these emotions co‐exists a desire of reciprocated regard, that is to say, a desire to be the cause of similar agreeable emotions to the one loved. These are constitutional impulses not at all consequent on any volition or choice, and as the involuntary element of love, are properly called _involuntary love_. Such love can not be justly demanded except where those qualities are, or can be, perceived which naturally awaken agreeable emotions. In cases where the qualities exist that would naturally awaken affection if noticed, and the want of it is owing to inattention, a proper regard to such qualities can be justly demanded. But this is the only particular in which involuntary love can be made the subject of law and penalties.

But the main element of love, as practically estimated among men, is such a desire of good to the one loved as involves the _good willing_ or voluntary effort to please and gratify. If a friend simply is pleased with our good qualities, and wishes to please us with his naturally agreeable traits in return, it is of little value in comparison with the truer love which is shown in _voluntary_ efforts to please and make happy. This last is the main element of true affection, and properly is called _voluntary love_ or _good willing_. Theologians express this distinction by the terms the _love of complacency_ and the _love of benevolence_.

Thus we have gained these definitions:

_Involuntary love_ toward God and toward men consists in agreeable emotions in view of admirable qualities.

_Voluntary love_ toward God and toward men consists in _good willing_, or the voluntary effort to please and make happy.

To “love our neighbor _as ourselves_” must refer solely to voluntary love, for we have no regard to our own agreeable qualities in the love of self. Self‐love is simply the desire and will to please and gratify self. This then is _the kind_ of love that can properly be demanded of all. Each one can justly be required to will or choose to please and gratify others the same as we do ourselves. Each can be required to estimate the happiness of every other mind as of the same value as his own, and to exercise _good willing_ for others as we do for our own enjoyment. From this primary principle necessarily results the law demanding that the good of the commonwealth shall always take precedence of any individual concern. If we are bound to value the happiness of each mind as _equal_ in value to our own, the inevitable result is that we are to estimate the happiness of _many_ minds as of _more_ value than our own, so as always to make our own enjoyment and wishes subordinate and secondary to the general good.

Still more are we to regard the feelings and wishes of our Creator and Supreme Lord. He has infinite susceptibilities of enjoyment and suffering, and thus whatever retards or promotes his wishes and plans must be of as much more value as his powers of enjoyment and suffering are greater than ours. The _love of good willing_ then should have first reference to God as the one whose will and wishes are of more value than any other being in this relation alone. Still more are we bound to regard his will and wishes as first in value, because his chief end and aim is the most possible happiness to all the creatures he has made. To will to please God as the chief end of our existence is the same as to choose to make the most possible happiness, not only to him, but to all his creatures.

Involuntary love is valuable as rendering it easier and more agreeable to labor for the welfare of others. Those whose interesting traits please us; those who, as children or friends, contribute to our enjoyment, and those who in any way give us pleasure, it is far easier to will for their enjoyment than it is to do so for those who do nothing to please us, and perhaps only give us discomfort, anxiety or disgust.

This exhibits an indirect way of securing the love of good will toward those who neither please us by their agreeable qualities, nor are causes of enjoyment to us in any way. Involuntary affection may be so strongly excited toward one whose qualities or conduct cause delight to self, that the desire to please that friend may become more animating than the desire for any personal gratification. Should such a friend be deeply interested in the happiness of his children, or of any other persons, whose character and conduct may in no way please us, still the desire to gratify such a friend may lead to good willing to those whom he loves, for his sake, in order to please and gratify him.

Thus it is that love to parents tends to produce “peace and good will” among children, who, in their little broils, are restrained by the desire to please their parents, when love to each other fails.

Here we have a view of the importance of _right conceptions_ of God’s character, in order to secure the perfect action of finite minds, especially in the first stage of existence.

It has been shown that the rules of right action are to be gained, in many cases, only by long experience and by a course of reasoning. Often, too, general rules (such, for example, as that we are _never to lie_, even to save life, or for _any_ reason,) must be obeyed when a person can see immediate evil, and no good to self or to any one by obedience. Now it is impossible for a rational mind to choose _pure evil_. There must be _some good_ in an object to excite desire, or it is impossible to choose it. But pleasurable emotions toward an all‐wise Creator, whose benevolence and wisdom excite love, delight, and confidence, may be such that _to please him_ gives abundant motive to obey the rules of right he enjoins when no other good can be perceived except that obedience will please him. And the more we perceive in him that excites admiration, love, and gratitude, the more strength of motive is gained.

It has been shown that a choice or act is _virtuous_ in all relations, when it absolutely is best for all, and when it is done in reference to a rule of rectitude, or _because_ it is right. The motive or reason of a choice decides whether or not it is virtuous.

Now as the Creator’s will and the rules of rectitude are the same, when we say that any act, in order to be virtuous, must have reference to God’s will, the question comes up, is an act virtuous _because it pleases God_, or does it please God _because it is virtuous_? _i.e._, because it conforms to those rules by which his chief end in creation is secured, and which rest on the eternal nature of things.

The last is the principle here assumed. God’s great end is the highest happiness of his creatures. Obedience to his laws is the mode for securing this end; his own actions are right as they conform to this end; and the actions of all his creatures are right only in the same relation.

So God’s “glory” consists in the highest happiness of his creatures, which can only be secured by their obedience to his laws.

This makes it clear that choosing as our chief end to obey all the physical, social, and moral laws of God, as learned by experience, is the same as loving God with all the heart, and our neighbors as ourselves. It is also living for God’s glory as the chief end; and it is being a truly righteous, virtuous, and pious man.

This distinction between voluntary and involuntary love enables us to discover certain dangers that result for want of such discrimination. Men may conceive of the Creator as desiring to be loved, admired, and glorified, just as selfish conquerors, like Alexander and Napoleon have done. In this view all their aims would be to excite agreeable emotions toward God by the contemplation of his various attributes. And thus they might be so absorbed in the indulgence of such delightful emotions as to become entirely heedless of the wants and the wishes of those around them. This kind of experience would cultivate selfishness instead of benevolence.

On the contrary, choosing to obey all God’s laws for happiness‐making on the largest scale, and viewing the lovely and glorious attributes of the Creator as _means_ to this end, would induce the only true virtue, while it is the true mode of pleasing our Maker and increasing his enjoyment.

The preceding furnishes the mode of harmonizing a great variety of expressions that may properly be given in answer to the great question, “what must we do to be saved?” as we gain this answer independently of revelation.

The first answer is, “believe in God’s teachings—or have faith in God.” This means, take the laws of God as revealed by reason and experience, and _obey_ them, and you shall be saved. It is a _practical_ and not a mere intellectual belief that constitutes this “saving faith.”

The next answer is, “repent,” or “repentance toward God.”

The word repent is used to signify, sometimes, simply remorse or pain for wrong‐doing. In another sense it signifies that sorrow for wrong‐doing which includes reformation. It is ceasing to disobey law and commencing a life of obedience. It is in this sense that men are saved by repentance.

Another answer is, “thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thyself.” This has been shown to signify, thou shalt choose as the chief end of life to make happiness the right way, that is, by obeying all the physical, social, and moral laws of God. “This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.”

Another answer is, “make it thy chief end to glorify God.” Inasmuch as God’s glory consists in the exhibition of his character as a benevolent being, all who promote his chief aim by making happiness according to his will, are living to glorify God.

Another answer is, “live a truly virtuous life.” It has been shown that true virtue consists in _obedience to the great law of sacrifice_ by which the lesser personal good is sacrificed to the greater good of all concerned.

Thus faith, repentance, love to God and man, making it our chief end to glorify God, living a virtuous life, all signify one and the same thing, (_i.e._,) choosing to find out and to obey all the physical, social, and moral laws of God as our chief end or ruling purpose.

The _righteous_ are those who have formed such a purpose, and who exhibit its results in their daily life.

The _wicked_ are those who have not formed such a purpose, and do not exhibit it in their daily life.

In the common language of every‐day life, when a person is intensely interested in any pursuit, it is said to be “his life.” And when a man changes from a vicious to a virtuous course he is said to “begin a new life.”

Thus it would be in agreement with the ordinary use of language to call a new‐formed purpose to obey all the laws of God the commencement of a new life. And as the beginning of natural life is the commencement of a life of _impulsive choices unregulated by law_, the commencement of a life of _obedience to law_ would, by a figure of speech, very naturally be called “a new birth.”

We have seen, in previous pages, that the formation of a ruling principle or governing purpose is sometimes the result of a slow process of educational influences, and sometimes it is a marked and sudden change. In the history of mind we find, as a general rule, that it is the slow process of educational training that secures a virtuous character in childhood, while the more sudden and marked changes are incident chiefly to more advanced life.

The term “_regeneration_” is used by theologians as meaning the formation of a ruling purpose to love and obey God, by man himself. By some, this change of mind is regarded as in all cases instantaneous, by others as sometimes a gradual and sometimes an instantaneous change.

The preceding still farther exhibits the fact that the whole foundation of religion and of morals rests on the answer to the question, what is _true virtue_ or _right voluntary_ action?