The nature of the love which our Lord inculcates, as a new commandment, is first explained in the sermon before us; though we doubt whether the preacher has put all, or even the principal, reasons for its being so denominated. _New_, in the text as well as in several other passages--for instance, _new_ heavens and a _new_ earth--has always appeared to us to indicate especial excellence or paramount importance. This commandment is not, as Mr. S. very properly observes, merely a revival, a vindication, or fresh enforcement of the spirit of the original law. "It is new," he says, "in relation to the parties commended to its exercise, the peculiarity of its nature, and the motive by which it is enforced. Under the second of these particulars the remarks of the preacher are somewhat feeble. The discriminative differences of Christian love are not clearly and forcibly drawn. We are told that it is "a spiritual principle--a supernatural endowment,--a property acquired in the process of that change by which Christians are born from above." So is that love to our enemies which Christianity requires us to cherish. We learn, further, that Christian love is "something more than good will; it is not simple humanity; it is brotherly love; an affection having its seat, not in the sympathy of the feelings, but in the sincerity of the heart." The distinction between "sympathy of the feelings" and "sincerity of the heart" is not very obvious; but, passing this, mere friendship, apart from Christianity, might be described in the same terms. Mr. S. adds: Christian love is "stronger than death; if needs be, it will lead a Christian to that last act of a devoted and divine friendship, to lay down his life for the brethren." True: so also is the love, not Christian, to which the apostle adverts, Rom. v. 7; and that of which, now and then, the idea and the precept is given; nay, and the example too, as Mr. S. must have known, by those to whom Christianity utterly unknown. Mr. S. appears to us, at pp. 11, 12, to have somewhat too sweepingly intimated that an "exclusive principle in the constitution of our churches" is indicative of a deficiency of the principle inculcated in the text. He has gone out of his way for the observations introduced on this point; and, as nineteen twentieths of the Christian world have always been, and are now, thus exclusive, it is somewhat daring to insinuate such a charge. If we take a narrower view of this subject, and regard only what are called _strict_ Baptists, whom Mr. S. appears to have had in his eye, we should be unwilling to pronounce judgment on the amount of the Christian love of such men as Kiffin, of olden time; Fuller, Kinghorn, and a host of others, of more modern date.