And with the beauty of purity the case is just the same. According to the view which the positivists have adopted, so little counting the cost of it, a pure human affection is a union of two things. It is not a possession only, but a promise; not a sentiment only, but a _pre_-sentiment; not a taste only, but a foretaste; and the chief sweetness said to be found in the former, is dependent altogether upon the latter. '_Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God_,' is the belief which, whether true or false as a fact, is implied in the whole modern cultus of love, and the religious reverence with which it has come to be regarded. In no other way can we explain either its eclecticism or its supreme importance. Nor is the belief in question a thing that is implied only. Continually it is expressed also, and this even by writers who theoretically repudiate it. Goethe, for instance, cannot present the moral aspects of Margaret's love-story without assuming it. And George Eliot has been obliged to presuppose it in her characters, and to exhibit the virtues she regards as noblest, on the pedestal of a belief that she regards as most irrational. But its completest expression is naturally to be found elsewhere. Here, for instance, is a verse of Mr. Robert Browning's, who, however we rank him otherwise, is perhaps unrivalled for his subtle analysis of the emotions: _Dear, when our one soul understands The great soul that makes all things new, When earth breaks up, and heaven expands, How will the change strike me and you, In the house not made with hands?_ Here, again, is another, in which the same sentiment is presented in a somewhat different form: _Is there nought better than to enjoy? No deed which done, will make time break, Letting us pent-up creatures through Into eternity, our due-- No forcing earth teach heaven's employ?_ _No wise beginning, here and now, Which cannot grow complete (earth's feat) And heaven must finish there and then? No tasting earth's true food for men, Its sweet in sad, its sad in sweet?_ To the last of these verses a singular parallel may be found in the works of a much earlier, and a very different writer, only the affection there dealt with is filial and not marital. In spite of this difference, however, it will still be much in point.