The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1889-03-06
For the Central Presbyterian
Religious Perplexity.
"'Tis point long to know.
Oft it causes anxious thought,
Do l love the Lord or MOI
Am l his or am l not 2"

Am his or am l not2"
Many long years ago, in the midst of
a powerful revival, brother to whom
we all looked up because of the depth of
his Christian experience, and his solemn
conservation, Che proved the sincerity of
it by his long life, ended only few years
ago, as g. devoted minister OF the GospeD,
said, That hymn ought never to have
been written. Every true child of God
may know, if he will, that he has been
born again and loves his Saviour"
He was pressing the doctrine of assur-
anee. Possibly, his after experience, in
dealing with troubled consciences, may
have modified his views. Ihave nothing
to say here upon the point of assurance
But, unless | am mistaken, not a few
Christians are disturbed in their expert
ence by the painful emergence of this
question, not because of the doctrine OF
assurance, but for different reason.
They have an indistinct comprehension
of the meaning of the word IoUe There
is in our language no word of more di-
verse applications, some of which are
apparently inconsistent with others.
l will not cffer definition OF the gen
eral term but will give some example of
its Specifications varying each from the
others in different degrees, until at length
we Can scarcely recognize any mutual re.
lation between them justitying the use of
the word as common to all.
We love ourselves, our parents, hus-
bands, wives, children and friends-we
love nature; her mountains, plains, and
views-we love society, and we love soil
i. L.
ments-we love sleep and we love good
dinner, and, alas we love some things
not merely trivial but sinful.
In all these, and innumerable other
like instances, it is obvious that the sig
MITIGATION of the general word IoUe is mod
flied and determined by the objects to
which it is applied and that while we
say we love so many things, we do not
love any two of them in just the same
way.
Keeping this in mind, let us consider
its religious use as bearing upon the
serious question, Do love the Lord or
nor We are to love the Father, Son.
and Holy Spirit. Even here, we may,
without irreverence, suggest discrim-
ination as to the feeling expressed by the
same word In our love for each of the
persons of the Godhead, there exists In
equal degree, the feeling of reverence
and of gratitude. But towards the
Father, our love is more distinctly
characterised by holy fear" Fear God
and keep his commandments" Towards
Jesus it is colored by a sense of human
brotherhood And we love the Holy
Spirit with something of the unde6nable
nearnees with which we love ourselves
Nor Is this differentiation without its
practical use of comfort in Christian ex
perience. Some believers are troubled
by the consciousness that their love to-
wards each of the persons Of the God
head, is not Of precisely the same char
acter nor, as they fear in precisely the
same degree. It may not be but one is
as real as the other, and he who bonors
the Son, honoreth the Father, and be
who loves the Holy Spirit, loves the
Father and the Son, for these three are
one God. We cannot love our parents,
hushands, wives, and children, all In the
same way, but we never doubt that we
really love them all respectively. Much
less il it. posslble, nor would il be right,
to love God with the same kind of love
that we bear TO the objects Of our earthly
love. Love to God and love to man, is
the sum Of the law But we are not TO
love our neqhbor as We love God.
And now, for example, if any Christian
mother is harsssing herself because she
Is conscious that she does not love Jesus
as she loves her husband or her child,
let her re assure herself by the reflection
that she is not required to love the Lord
with the same kind Of love that she be.
stowe upon any earthly object. Let her,