evil. If the fear of persecution deter you from following the bias of your mind in associating with the virtuous, God will add you to the church.

(2.) By impressing its fellowship upon your heart as a duty. Those who put the question on the day of pentecost," What shall we do? were exhorted to save themselves from that untoward generation; and the exhortation was grounded upon the duty just before laid down, to repent, and, by baptism, to enter into the church, as the only means of obtaining the remission of sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost. In 2 Corinthians, vi. 17, 18, the condition on which God has promised to receive us graciously is, that we abandon our ungodly associates: Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters saith the Lord Almighty." How vain, therefore, must be our expectation of enjoying the favour of God while we maintain communion with the sons of Belial!

(3.) The Lord adds to the church actually, by means of his ministers. Baptism is the rite of initiation into the christian church, just as circumcision was into the Jewish church. In the case of those who were united to the faithful on the day of pentecost, the only introductory act we read of was baptism. The same observation will apply to every other instance recorded in the New Testament. The unbaptized are never recognised as members of the christian community, and the baptized are uniformly acknowledged as belonging to it. I need not dwell longer upon this subject, because it is generally admitted that baptism is the rite of initiation into the church. The disputed point is, whether this rite admits into the universal church only, or also into the particular church of the administrator. If creeds and usages did not stand in the way, this question would be easily answered. An acknowledged member of the universal church must have a right to communion in a particular church, because he is entitled to the pastoral attentions of the minister who

admitted him, and to the ordinances of the Lord's house, and to the fellowship of saints. To deny this, would be as absurd as to contend that a man who is a legal and good British subject, has no right to reside in any part of the British dominions, and no legal claim to the protection and privileges of British law.

The reason why baptism, though it is granted to be the door of entrance into the universal church, is denied to give any right of admission into a particular church is, the claim of its members to have a vote on the fitness of candidates for communion. If the right to communion with the church of the administrator flows from the ordinance, then it follows, that the minister who gives the ordinance has the power of admitting into his church without being obliged to consult the members. To give a colour of consistency to the assumed interference of the church in the election of its members, the above distinction has been invented. That the minister's right to baptize is derived from Christ, and not from the people, is granted on all hands. Indeed, what can be plainer than the terms of the commission, Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing," etc. On the ground of this commission, ministers had uniformly added to the churches to which they belonged, by the divinely appointed rite, till the rise of independency. Not a solitary text can be adduced from the sacred writings to show that the people had any authority upon this subject.

66

This new state of things may lead to the greatest absurdities. Suppose a person rejected by the church whose minister gave him the ordinance, and then inform me what are the privileges which he enjoys as a member of the universal church? Christ has enjoined upon his ministers, in reference to those they have baptized, to "teach them to observe all things whatsoever he has commanded." (Matt. xxviii. 20.) The minister has, by the ordinance, established the pastoral relation between himself and the subject; he must, therefore, press upon the disciple the observance of all the precepts of Christ. One of these precepts is, to receive

the Lord's supper. How is he to observe this when the church hath rejected him? Another is, to dwell in unity and love with his christian brethren. How can he possibly do this, so long as they refuse communion with him? Thus the commission and precepts of Christ are made void by the assumption of private members.

"But the people think," you say, 66 that under their superintendence the church will be better governed." No doubt they do. It is one of the results of "the march of intellect," that disciples are to instruct their teachers, and subjects govern their rulers. But common minds did not take these gigantic strides in the days of the apostles. The three thousand on the day of pentecost could not, besides being baptized by the apostles, have their characters scrutinized by the church, before they were added to it; for as both were done the same day, there was not time for it. I think the baptizing of three thousand was a pretty good day's work. But to suppose that, in addition to this, the church examined each candidate separately as to his experience and moral character, is one of the greatest absurdities that can well be conceived.

Admitting that baptism is the rite of initiation into the church, some have doubted whether all ministers have a commission to baptize, because St. Paul says, "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel." (1 Cor. i. 17.) The Corinthians were divided into parties, one saying, “I am of Paul; another, I am of Apollos," etc. This he warmly reprehends, and asks," Was Paul crucified for you; or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" He adds, "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius, lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanus besides, I know not whether I baptized any other." From which it is manifest, that the apostle apprehended a great abuse might arise from the circumstance of his administration of the rite; and this led him to thank God that he had personally given the

ordinance to very few at Corinth. And it was no

66

doubt in this sense that Christ did not send him to baptize, that is, he did not require him to perform the rite himself; for, supposing his commission to have been the same as the other apostles received, it did not imply that they should personally perform the office, but only that they should direct its administration. Thus, though Peter was sent under the commission recorded, (Matt. xxviii. 19, 20,) yet he did not in all cases give the ordinance himself; for when Cornelius and his family and friends were converted under his ministry, instead of his baptizing them, "He commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." (Acts x. 48.) In John iv. 1, 2, we read, When, therefore, the Lord knew how the pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples," etc. This passage shows, that though the authority to give the rite was in Jesus, yet he did not personally administer it, but deputed the disciples to do the work. St. Paul had authority to baptize, or he would not have given the ordinance to Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanus, at Corinth; nor to the jailor and his family at Philippi, etc. But as we have seen above that this was a duty which might be delegated to others, the Lord did not require St. Paul to perform it personally; and in the circumstances of the Corinthian church, he thanked God that he had done it only in a few instances. The passage, therefore, does not imply the non-importance of baptism, as some have supposed, or that it may be performed independent of the ministry, but merely that the minister is not required to give the rite himself; it is enough if he see that it be done. In Acts xviii. we have an account of the apostle's first visit to Corinth, and that "many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized." Aquila, Silas, and Timothy, were at Corinth at the time; and it is probable that these ministers gave the ordinance under the direction of the apostle.

Many who enter christian societies in the present day, do not need the ordinance at the time, as they received it in their infancy; but the right to induct them is not, in consequence of this circumstance, transferred to other hands. In apostolic times, christians were often moving from church to church. Thus, "When Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples; but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him; and how he had preached boldly at Damascus, in the name of the Lord Jesus. And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem." (Acts ix. 26-28.) In this case Saul was admitted into the church at Jerusalem, not by the people, for they were for rejecting him; but in consequence of a notification in his favour from the evangelist Barnabas, to the apostles, and not to the people. In cases of this sort, therefore, as well as by baptism, the Lord adds to his church by means of his ministers.

The modern notion, that we may be saved at last just as well out of a church, as in one, is as dangerous as it is novel. I cannot trace it back much beyond a century; and I am quite sure it has nothing to support it in the Bible. If you can get to heaven without passing through the church on earth, I hope you will not deny me the same privilege; and then the church is one of the most useless institutions ever set up. The obligation to membership, where it may be had, must be binding on all christians, or on none. Suppose, then, every christian to withdraw from the church, and the church will immediately be extinct. But if the church were extinct, christianity would soon be extinct too for the christian religion is not like a mere system of philosophy, which we may learn from a book and adopt as our own, without cultivating any acquaintance with others of the same sect: it contains important institutions, and requires many public and associated acts of its professors. A man cannot be a