And though some define loving to be _bene velle alicui ut illi bene sit_, to desire another's welfare, yet indeed this may be without any true formal love at all. As I may desire the welfare of my horse, without any proper love to him, even for myself and use. When God from eternity willeth to make Paul, and to convert and save him, _ut illi bene sit_, it is called love of benevolence; but properly it is only to be called, a will to make Paul good and lovely;[170] it being only God himself who is the original and ultimate end of that will and purpose; and himself only which he then loveth, there being nothing but himself to love; till in that instant that Paul is existent, and so really lovely. For Paul _in esse cognito_ is not Paul; yet no reality doth _oriri de novo_ in God; but a new respect and denomination, and in the creature new effects. (Of which elsewhere.)
_Quest._ IV. Must I love every one as much as myself in degree, or only some?
_Answ._ You must love every one impartially as yourself, according to his goodness; and you must wish as well to every one as to yourself; but you must love no man complacentially so much as yourself, who is not or seemeth not to have as much loveliness, that is, as much goodness, or as much of God, as yourself.
_Quest._ V. Must I love any one more than myself?
_Answ._ Yes, every one that is and appeareth better than yourself. Your sensitive love to another cannot be as much as to yourself; and your beneficence (ordinarily) must be most to yourself, because God in nature and his laws hath so appointed it; and your benevolence to yourself and to others must be alike; but your rational estimation, and love or complacence, (with the honour and praise attending it,) must be more to every one that is better than yourself; for that which is best is most amiable, and that which hath most of God.
_Quest._ VI. Will it not then follow, that I must love another man's wife and children better than mine own, when they are really better?
_Answ._ Yes, no doubt; but it is only with that rational, estimative love. But there is besides a love to wife and children, which is in some measure sensitive, which you are not obliged to give to others; and rationally they are more amiable to you, in their peculiar relations and respects, though others are more amiable in other respects; and besides, though you value and rationally love another more, yet the expressions must not be the same; for those must follow the relation according to God's command. You may not cohabit or embrace, nor maintain and provide for others as your own, even when you rationally love them more; the common good requires this order in the expressive part, as well as God's command.
_Quest._ VII. Who is my neighbour that I must love as myself?
_Answ._ Not devils or damned souls, who are under justice and from under mercy, and are none of our society: but, 1. Every natural man _in via_, being a member of God's kingdom in the same world, is to be loved as my natural self; and every spiritual man as a member of the same kingdom of Christ, must be loved as my spiritual self; and every spiritual man as such, above my natural self as such; and no natural man as such, so much as my spiritual self as such: so that no man on earth is excluded from your love, which must be impartial to all as to yourself, but proportioned to their goodness.
_Quest._ VIII. Are not antichrist and those that sin against the Holy Ghost excepted out of this our love, and out of our prayers and endeavours of their good?
_Answ._ Those that (with Zanchy) think Mahomet to be antichrist, may so conclude, because he is dead and out of our communion. Those that take the papacy to be antichrist (as most protestants do) cannot so conclude; because, as there is but one antichrist, that is, one papacy, though a hundred popes be in that seat, so every one of those popes is _in via_, and under mercy, and recoverable out of that condition; and therefore is to be loved and prayed for accordingly. And as for those that blaspheme the Holy Ghost, it is a sin that one man cannot certainly know in another, ordinarily at least; and therefore cannot characterize a person unfit for our love, and prayers, and endeavours.
_Quest._ IX. May we not hate the enemies of God? How then must we love them as ourselves?