scripture suggests several things which deserve a distinct and serious consideration. Accordingly, I propose,

I. To consider the materials of which a church of Christ is

formed;

II. To consider how these materials are formed into a church of Christ; and,

III. To consider what power or authority Christ has given to his church after it is regularly formed.

I. Let us consider the materials of which a church of Christ is formed.

There is a visible and invisible church. The invisible church comprehends all real saints, or all of mankind who will be finally sanctified and saved. But by a visible church we are to understand a society of visible saints. By visible saints are meant such as profess to be real saints, and appear to be so in the eye of Christian charity. Such persons as these are the materials of which a church of Christ is formed. None were admitted into the church under the Mosaic dispensation, but those who made a public profession of real grace, or true love to God. All that belonged to that church, solemnly avouched the Lord to be their God, and engaged to love him with all their hearts, and to obey all his commands, which rendered them visible saints in the judgment of charity. And as to the gospel church, it is plain that it was composed of none but visible saints. No other but baptized persons were admitted to communion; and no adult persons but such as professed repentance and faith, were admitted to baptism; which shows that they were visible saints. Of such materials was the church of Corinth composed; for the apostle speaks to them as saints by profession. "Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." And he inscribes his epistle to the church of Ephesus in similar language. "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus." These inscriptions plainly suppose that the apostles considered the various churches which they had planted in different places, as visible saints, or professed friends and followers of Christ. Accordingly, Peter, in his epistle to the churches in general, addresses them under the character of real saints. "Ye also as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." Here all the churches, in the days of the apostles, are represented as composed of living members; such as were renewed, sanctified, and made meet for the Master's use. They were

living branches of Christ the living vine, or living members of Christ the living head. But such materials, while separate and unconnected, do not constitute a church of Christ, any more than the materials of Solomon's temple were a temple, before they were collected and framed into that sacred building by the hands of artificers. This leads us to consider,

II. How the materials that have been mentioned, are formed into a church of Christ.

The materials must be prepared before they can be formed into this spiritual building. You remember that all the materials for the temple were prepared before they were collected; and when they were collected, there was nothing to do but to put them together in that beautiful form which was divinely prescribed. In this respect, I apprehend, the temple was intended to be a type of the church, as well as of the incarnation of Christ. For the materials of a gospel church are all to be fitted and prepared by divine grace, before they are collected and formed into a spiritual building. It was certainly so in the days of the apostles. They prepared materials before they erected churches. They went from place to place and preached the gospel; and as many as professed to believe the gospel and were baptized, and being of a competent number, they formed into a distinct church. But how did they form churches? and how are churches now to be formed? or what is it that constitutes a number of visible saints a proper church? I answer, a mutual covenant. It is by confederation that a number of individual christians become a visible church of Christ. A number of professing christians cannot be formed into a church without their freely and mutually covenanting to walk together in all the duties and ordinances of the gospel. They may be real and visible saints while they remain unconnected and separate; but they cannot be a proper church, without entering into covenant, and laying themselves under certain obligations to each other, to live and act like christians. And as this is a point of great importance in the present discourse, I shall offer several considerations to support it.

1. Confederation is the band of union among civil societies, and analogy requires the same band of union in a religious society. Civil government is founded in compact. Individuals are not a civil society, until they have formed themselves into one, by an explicit or implicit compact, agreement, or covenant. Before they have laid themselves under a mutual engagement, they are unconnected individuals, and have no power or authority over one another. But after they have freely and voluntarily entered into a compact or covenant to live and conduct towards one another according to certain laws, rules and regu

lations, they become a civil society, vested with civil power and authority. And it is only by confederation, that individual christians can form themselves into a church, and bind themselves to walk together according to the rules of the gospel.

2. It is universally allowed that a church of Christ have a right to watch over and discipline their own members. But individual christians, before they are formed into a church state, have no such power over one another. They may indeed reprove or exhort one another privately; but they have no right to call any one to account, and censure him for breaking the laws of Christ, publicly and authoritatively. But after they have engaged to watch over one another, and discipline one another for scandalous offences, then each individual becomes bound to submit to the reproof, admonition and censure of the whole body. His obligation to submit arises from the bond of the covenant which he has made. I may add,

3. That nothing besides a covenant can give form to a church, or be a sufficient bond of union. Mere Christian affection cannot. Though all Christian churches ought to be connected by the bond of brotherly love, yet this alone is not sufficient to make a number of christians a church of Christ. This bond of union runs through all the Christian world, and cordially unites real christians of all denominations, though divided into various distinct societies. This common bond of union cannot be the principal bond of union in any particular church. Nor is cohabitation a sufficient bond of union in a congregational church. A number of christians merely living in the same city, town, or parish, does not make them a church. Nor do they become a church, by usually meeting together for social or public worship. Nor does baptism constitute a person a member of any particular church. Many of those strangers in Jerusalem, who were baptized on the day of Pentecost, probably never saw one another again after they left Jerusalem, so that their baptism could not make them members of any particular church. Thus it appears that a number of christians may form themselves into a proper church or religious society, by a mutual covenant to walk together in all the commands and ordinances of the gospel. It still remains to consider,

III. What power or authority belongs to a particular church. It is granted by all, that every particular church has some ecclesiastical power. And since a particular church is formed by compact or covenant, it hence appears that a particular church does not derive its power from the church universal, but directly from Christ, the source of all ecclesiastical authority. We shall, therefore, consider it as an established point, that each

particular church is possessed of ecclesiastical power; and of course we have only to inquire what kind of power is lodged in a particular church.

And as to this, I would observe in general that it is only executive power. Christ is the sole lawgiver in the church. He

has made all the laws by which it is to be governed. He has delegated no legislative power to a church, by which it has authority to make ecclesiastical laws or canons. The church of Rome has manifested herself to be anti-christian, by claiming and exercising such a power. No particular church whatever has a right to make a single law or canon to bind its members. It has only the right to execute the law which Christ has made and published in the gospel. These laws are summarily comprised in the words of our text, and are abundantly sufficient, if properly and faithfully executed, to preserve the existence, and to promote the edification and purity of the church. So much power every church needs, in order to prevent its crumbling to pieces, and to prevent or cure any corruptions and disorders that may arise in it. But to be more particular, I would observe,

1. That every church has a right to admit members into their own Christian communion, according to the rules of the gospel. It is essential to every voluntary society to admit whom they please into their number. They are the proper and competent judges to determine who are worthy or unworthy to be admitted. It would be very irrational to suppose that any particular church is obliged to admit every one that offers to join their holy communion. They have an undoubted right to judge of the qualifications of proponents, and receive or reject them, according to an impartial judgment of Christian charity. This right they never ought to give up.

2. A church has a right to watch over and reprove one another in private. This right they have voluntarily given to each other by their mutual covenant. They might, indeed, have done this in a friendly manner, if they had not engaged to do it; but after they have engaged to do it, they have a right to watch over and reprove one another authoritatively, when they see any member visibly depart from the precepts or prohibitions of the gospel. This is Christ's direction in the text. "If thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone." And the apostle directs christians to "exhort one another daily, lest any should be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin."

3. A church has a right to discipline its members for unchristian conduct, by admonition and excommunication. This authority is expressly given to them by Christ himself in the

words of our text. "Moreover, if thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the church; but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." This is all the ecclesiastical authority that Christ has given to any particular church; and this is only executive authority. As soon as any competent number of christians have voluntarily united and bound themselves together, by confederation, to walk together and attend divine ordinances, they are a regular gospel church, and invested with all ecclesiastical power. But after they are regularly formed into a church, they still need to be organized, which they have an independent power to do for themselves. Every civil society has an inherent right to organize its own government, by choosing and installing its own officers. The same essential right every regularly formed church has, to organize its own ecclesiastical government, by choosing and installing its own officers. This commonwealth have a right to organize their own government, and this they do every year, by choosing their own officers, and appointing the lieutenant governor, or some other magistrate, to administer the oaths of office to the governor and other state officers, whom they have chosen. He, or they, who administer the oaths of office, do not convey any of their own power, but only the power of the state, to those to whom they administer the qualifying oaths. Just so the members of a church have a right to organize their own ecclesiastical government, by choosing and installing their own officers. They have a right to choose deacons, and then to ordain them as they judge most scriptural. And they have the same right to choose their own ministers, and after that, to instal them into office. For ordination is nothing more than installing a minister into office. The ordainers do not convey any authority of their own, but only the authority of Christ, through the medium of the church, to the man they ordain, by which he is duly qualified to preach the doctrines, and administer the ordinances of the gospel to his own people, and wherever he is called in providence to execute his ministerial office, with which Christ has invested him. I know that many suppose that the power of ordination is lodged in the hands of the clergy, independently of the church; and that this power has been handed down, in a lineal succession of ordained ministers, from the days of the apostles to this day. But this is a very groundless opinion. For the line of succession has been