it efficacious to our comfort, peace, and advancement in the Divine life.

When the glorious Person, whom God has set King upon his Holy Hill of Zion, comes in to see the guests at his table; how delightful will it be to each of us, my brethren, to be found by him clad in the robe of righteousness, and thus prepared to receive him with the honour which is his due! How delightful to be welcomed by him to his table, and received with smiles of complacency! How distressing on the contrary, how dreadful, to appear before him without a wedding garment! Who must not be speechless, when He sternly and awfully demands the cause of this unseemly, and irreverent appearance? Who must not be overwhelmed with anguish and dismay, to hear, pronounced concerning himself, the terrible sentence, Bind him, hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth?

SERMON CLXII.

THE EXTRAORDINARY MEANS OF GRACE. THE DISCIPLINE OF THE CHURCH.

MATTHEW Xviii. 15-18.-Moreover, if thy Brother trespass against thee, go and tel 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 unto the Church; but if he shall neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man, and a Publican.

IN the six preceding discourses, I have considered at length, two Ordinances of the Christian Church, commonly styled Sacraments; to wit, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. I shall now proceed to the consideration of another, and the only remaining ordinance peculiar to that body; to wit, Christian Discipline.

In examining this subject, I shall endeavour to point out, 1. The Duties to be done,

II. The Manner, in which,

III. The Ends, for which, and,

IV. The Persons, by whom, they are to be done; and,

V. The Motives to the performance.

1. The particular Duties, to be done in the course of Christian Discipline, are,

1. What may be called Private Remonstrance.

If thy brother shall 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. The ground of proceeding here, as stated by our Saviour, is an actual trespass of one member of the Church against another. It is a trespass, Eav de apagenon 815 de o adeλpos os, If thy brother sin against thee. If he commit a serious fault. The mere operations, and evidences, of those infirmities, which are common to good men as well as others, are no part of this ground; and furnish no warrant for the proceeding. Zealous persons are often ready to construe every such infirmity into a serious transgression, and to swell pence, owed to themselves, into the value of talents. In this manner, they degrade religion into a spirit of captiousness; and, as far as in them lies, employ the authority of the Church as an engine to gratify their own unreasonable passions, and to disturb the peace of their neighbours. The same things are also true of persons, of a peculiarly exact and rigid character; who often demand, that their fellow-Christians should walk by

rules, formed by themselves; and appear to feel as if themselves had been constituted definitive judges concerning the Christian privileges of other men.

It must be a fault actually committed. If thy brother trespass against thee; that is, in reality. It must not be a mere object of suspicion, or belief. It is easy for us to injure a Christian brother by our unjust suspicion, more than he would have injured us, had he committed the very fault, of which we suspect him. We are, therefore, to be assured of the fact, before we take any measures of a disciplinary nature. It will always be mischievous to others, as well as disgraceful and injurious to ourselves, to create faults for them by the indulgence of our own passions and prejudices, as well as to suppose them, without ample proof.

When such assurance, and such proof, have been obtained, the person, against whom the trespass is committed, is here required to go, and tell it to the offending party in a manner absolutely private. No persons are to be witnesses of the interview. Here he is to explain, without communicating his design to any other person, his own views concerning the trespass, and the proper conduct to be adopted by way of reparation. He is bound to see, that these views are conformed to the Gospel; and that both the temper, and the language, are such, as the Gospel requires; meek; gentle; unoffending; calculated not to irritate, or alienate, but to convince, persuade, and conciliate. No strife is permitted by our Saviour to arise here; no provocation; no unkindness. In this manner, it is ever to be remembered, the offending brother will be gained, if gained at all.

If the spirit of the Gospel were allowed to operate with its whole efficacy; every debate of this nature would terminate here. Unhappily, such is not always the case. Our Saviour, foreseeing this state of things, has provided for it the best remedy, which the human character, and circumstances, will admit. He has, in the text, directed the person, against whom the trespass is committed, to take, after having failed to obtain reparation, one or two other members of the Church, and, with their aid, to renew his efforts for the same desirable purpose of gaining the trespassing brother. These brethren are called in for two purposes. One is; that they may be witnesses of every thing, which pertains to the existing state of the transaction. The other is; that the weight of their character, and the wisdom of their counsels, may influence the trespasser to such future conduct towards his brother, as will become his Christian profesThe former of these purposes is directly expressed in the text. The latter is plainly involved in the phraseology, and, if he neglect to hear them. This supposes these brethren to use their advice, and persuasion, and of course, the weight of their character, for a right, and happy termination of the controversy.

sion.

From this view of the subject it is obvious, that the persons, called in for this purpose, should possess a character unexcep

tionable; particularly in the eye of the Trespasser; that they should be persons of weight, wisdom, moderation, and gentleness; and sufficiently disinterested to consult the good of both parties with benevolence, and impartiality. As these are the men, whom a Trespasser will hear, if he will hear any man; so the injured brother is plainly bound to call to his aid men of this description, for the adjustment of his controversy. It is hardly necessary to add, that both parties are bound to listen with meekness, candour, and cordiality, to the counsels of these brethren.

2. The next step in the progress of Ecclesiastical Discipline is ADMONITION.

It may be, it sometimes is, the fact, that the Trespasser will not listen to private remonstrance in either of these forms. In this case, our Saviour directs the injured brother to bring his cause to the Church. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church. I shall hereafter inquire into the meaning of the word Church in this place, and shall presume here, that the first application, to be made in this case, is to the body, commonly denoted by the word in our own Country. This body is bound to receive, hear, and adjust, the cause.

Should the accused person be found guilty of the fault, laid to his charge; it becomes the duty of the Church solemnly to admonish him of his sin, and the absolute necessity of atoning for it by making the proper reparation, with the spirit of the Gospel. 3. The next step in the process is Excommunication.

It is reasonably expected, that any member of a Church will listen to the voice of the whole body of his fellow-Christians, with whom he is in immediate communion. Accordingly, the process of discipline almost always terminates, here, with admonition. Still there are cases, in which, either from an apprehension of being innocent, or what is probably more frequent, as well as more unhappy, from passion, pride, and obstinacy, the Trespasser refuses to hear even the solemn voice of this tribunal. In such cases, the Church is directed to withdraw from him all Christian privileges, so far as their own communion is concerned or their power extends. Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man, and a Publican. These words, as you well know, denoted to a Jew, the worst of his fellow-men. Among such men the Trespasser is henceforth to be accounted by those, whom he has refused to hear; and, in my view, by all, who consider their system of proceedings as evangelical.

This sentence is commonly spoken of as twofold, the greater Excommunication, and the less: the latter not uncommonly termed suspension. The difference between them is this: In the latter, a person is suspended from the privileges of Church-membership for a period; sometimes, however, an indefinite one; with a hope, plainly intimated, that he will ere long return to his duty. In the former, he is absolutely excluded from all the peculiar privileges of

the Church, without any apparent expectation, that he will be reinstated in them again.

This sentence existed among the ancient Jews, and the ancient Christians; has been continued in the Greek and Romish Churches; and exists among the various Protestant Churches, with different degrees of formality, and severity. It was in use even among the Heathen; and is now one of the most terrible punishments, inflicted in Hindoostan. Among the Jews, Greeks, and Romanists, and even in the English Church, it is followed by terrible conse quences, as well as attended by several circumstances, to which the Scriptures, so far as I can perceive, give no countenance. In some cases it has been accompanied by dreadful imprecations; and followed, in some, by a variety of civil disabilities, and sufferings, in themselves unjust and inhuman, and wholly unwarranted by Christ or his Apostles. In this country, the Scriptures are allowed to control, exactly, every thing relating to this subject. Christ directs in the text, that the person who refuses to hear the Church, shall be considered by it as an Heathen man, and a PubliSt. Paul directs the Church to Mark them that cause divisions, and avoid them, Rom. xvi. 17: To withdraw from a Brother, who walks disorderly, 2 Thess. iii. 6: and to reject, after the first and second admonition, a Heretic, or a person who creates division among its members, Titus iii. 10.

can.

In all these directions nothing is warranted, beyond a single refusal, on the part of the Church, to admit the offending brother to a participation of its peculiar privileges. The crimes are all specified; and, in my opinion, we have no right to add to their number. The punishment is specified: and we have no right to add to its severity. The reason is plain; all the authority, which the Church possesses, it derives solely from Christ; and can exercise no more than is given. It can constitute no new crimes; and form, if I may be allowed the expression, no constructive treasons. It can add no new modes of punishment. Contempt, therefore, exhibited in a Bishop's Court, an offence wholly of a civil nature, cannot be a proper foundation for this punishment. Nor can imprisonment, or any other infliction of the Magistrate, be connected lawfully with Excommunication. These, and all other things of the like nature, I consider as unhappy relics of preceding, and very unhappy, times.

St. Paul, 1 Cor. v. 11, directs the brethren of that Church, not to keep company, if any man, that is called a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such an one, no not to eat. These words contain an additional punishment to that, which is inflicted under the directions quoted above; and require Christians, in the cases specified, not voluntarily to have intercourse with Church-members, excommunicated for these crimes. I say excommunicated for these crimes, because St. Paul supposes the persons, referred to, to be severally