e, the
loftiness of the pretensions of these nominal Christians; and we shall
hereafter have occasion to mention another consideration, of which the
effect must be, still further to reduce their claims. Meanwhile, let it
suffice to remark, that we must not rest satisfied with merely
superficial appearances, if we would form a fair estimate of the degree
of purity and vigour, in which the principle of good will towards men
warms the bosoms of the generality of professed Christians in the higher
and more opulent classes in this country. In a highly polished state of
society, for instance, we do not expect to find moroseness; and in an
age of great profusion, though we may reflect with pleasure on those
numerous charitable institutions, which are justly the honour of Great
Britain; we are not too hastily to infer a strong principle of internal
benevolence, from liberal contributions to the relief of indigence and
misery. When these contributions indeed are equally abundant in frugal
times, or from individuals personally oeconomical, the source from
which they originate becomes less questionable. But a vigorous principle
of philanthropy must not be at once conceded, on the ground of liberal
benefactions to the poor, in the case of one who by his liberality in
this respect is curtailed in no necessary, is abridged of no luxury, is
put to no trouble either of thought or of action; who, not to impute a
desire of being praised for his benevolence, is injured in no man's
estimation; in whom also familiarity with large sums has produced that
freedom in the expenditure of money, which (thereby affording a fresh
illustration of the justice of the old proverb, "Familiarity breeds
contempt,") it never fails to operate, except in minds under the
influence of a strong principle of avarice.

Our conclusion, perhaps, would be less favourable, but not less fair, if
we were to try the characters in question by those surer tests, which
are stated by the Apostle to be less ambiguous marks of a real spirit of
philanthropy. The strength of every passion is to be estimated by its
victory over passions of an opposite nature. What judgment then shall we
form of the force of the benevolence of the age, when measured by this
standard? How does it stand the shock, when it comes into encounter with
our pride, our vanity, our self-love, our self-interest, our love of
ease or of pleasure, with our ambition, with our desire of worldly
estimation? Does i