wrought, at the same time that the former gradually lessens. Perception of distress in others is a natural excitement, passively to pity, and actively to relieve it: but let a man set himself to attend to, inquire out, and relieve distressed persons, and he cannot but grow less and less sensibly affected with the various miseries of life, with which he must become acquainted ; when yet, at the same time, benevolence, considered not as a passion but as a practical principle of action, will strengthen and whilst he passively compassionates the distressed less, he will acquire a greater aptitude actively to assist and befriend them. So also, at the same time that the daily instances of men's dying around us give us daily a less sensible passive feeling or apprehension of our own mortality, such instances greatly contribute to the strengthening a practical regard to it in serious men, i.e. to forming an habit of acting with a constant view to it."* * This passage may teach us to appreciate a very remarkable contrast. One man is free from the dominion of bad passions; and his good feelings quietly and systematically serve their proper purposes. Another is governed by the bad, which being indulged gain increased power; while the good not duly operating become at length inefficient. Is there not something especially moral in these truths respecting passive principles and active habits? If it was intended that man being moved by certain good feelings, as for instance of pity for distress, should act accordingly, i. e. proceed to exert himself, with a view of affording relief; and if having felt the emotion, being sensible of the call upon him, he does not act; would it a priori seem likely that God would allow His good gifts to be habitually slighted? Would it appear consistent with His dignity, or suitable to His wisdom, continually and for ever to persevere in supplying motives and opportunities to mankind, of which men never availed themselves? See too what experience teaches us. Is it not of a piece with the general dealings of Providence, that a call not being obeyed, does gradually become less powerful, and at length cease? Even in our temporal affairs if we neglect opportunities, we are not able to recal them at pleasure. So in Scripture we read, "From him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath." (Matth. xxvi. 29.) Again, if on the other hand the passive principles, supposed good, produce their due effect; if they generate active habits, and if the principles, at the very time that they are less lively in perception than they were, are found to be somehow wrought more thoroughly into the temper and character, and are more effectual in influencing practice; then indeed may it not well be tolerated and permitted, (let us speak with all reverence!) that the passive impressions become by repetition gradually weaker? For their object is at length accomplished; and there is no further need of their very perceptible power. Moreover, if bad passive impressions, as those of envy, revenge, are allowed habitually to influence to action; then naturally (and how can it be said unjustly?) the moral character becomes in the worst manner vitiated. For a step beyond the mere admission of evil principles being taken, and active habits being formed; the man only reaps what he has sown; and whom can he blame but himself? Whereas, on the contrary, if the evil affection, the passive principle, is always checked, and so, not leading to action, becomes gradually weaker, and at length a habit of insensibility to its power is |