opposite to a general benevolence. This kind of self-love is properly
communication of his own glory, and what he delights in as he delights in his own glory. The creature has no less benefit by it; neither has such a disposition less of a direct tendency to the creature's benefit; or the less of a tendency to love to the creature, when the creature comes to exist. Nor is this disposition in God to communicate of and diffuse his own good the less excellent because it is implied in his love and regard to himself. For his love to himself don't imply it any otherwise but as it implies a love to whatever is worthy and excellent. The emanation of God's glory is in itself worthy and excellent, and so God delights in it: and his delight in this excellent thing is implied in his love to himself, or his own fullness; because that is the fountain, and so the sum and comprehension of everything that is excellent. And the matter standing thus, 'tis evident that these things cannot derogate from the excellency of this disposition in God, to an emanation of his own fullness, or communication of good to the creature.
Nor does God's inclination to communicate good in this manner, i.e. from regard to himself, or delight in his own glory, at all diminish the freeness of his beneficence in this communication. This will appear if we consider particularly in what ways doing good to others from selflove may be inconsistent with the freeness of beneficence. And I conceive there are only these two ways,
1. When any does good to another from confined self-love, that is opposite to a general benevolence. This kind of self-love is properly called selfishness. In some sense, the most benevolent generous person in the world seeks his own happiness in doing good to others, because he places his happiness in their good. His mind is so enlarged as to take them, as it were, into himself. Thus when they are happy he feels it, he partakes with them, and is happy in their happiness. This is so far from being inconsistent with the freeness of