IN the Presbyterian Church the main steps in calling and induction of a minister are of a very solemn nature. Obligations are entered into by minister and people that are of a binding nature and ought always to be regarded as such. The minister is asked: “Do you promise to submit yourself willingly and humbly, in the spirit of meekness, unto the admonitions of the brethren of this Presbytery, and to be subject to them, and all other Presbyteries and superior judicatories of this Church, where God in His providence will cast your lot; and that, according to your power, you shall maintain the unity and peace of this Church against error and schism, notwithstanding of whatsoever trouble or persecution may arise, and that you shall follow no divisive courses from the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government of this Church?” The unconscionable answering of this solemn question has often been commented on and rightly condemned as a trifling with solemn things.
The thoughtless way in which a Call is signed by some, if one is to judge of their after actions, has not, however, been so often commented on. In the Free Presbyterian Church the privilege of electing and calling a minister belongs to members in full communion. It is usual for the kirk-session to bring forward the name or names of ministers upon whom they have decided. But the communicants’ right of choosing their minister is not thereby usurped for they are at liberty to bring forward the name of any minister they think suitable for the charge at the congregational meeting called for the election of a minister and full liberty is to be given them to do so. The interim-moderator’s duty is to see that this privilege be not in any way denied to the communicants. If they feel that their rights are in any way interfered with they may have recourse to the Presbytery. When the communicants, thus exercising their privilege, have given a call to a minister they do so by signing their names to the following: “We, the undersigned Elders, Deacons, and Members of the Free Presbyterian Church congregation at . . . , desirous of promoting the glory of God and the good of the Church, being destitute of a fixed pastor, and being assured by good information and our own experience, of the ministerial abilities, piety, literature and prudence, as also of the suitableness to our capacities of the gifts of you, Mr. . . . , preacher of the gospel, have agreed to invite, call, and entreat, like as we, by these presents, do heartily invite, call, and entreat you to undertake the office of pastor among us, and the charge of our souls; and further, upon your accepting this our Call, *promise you all dutiful respect, encouragement, and obedience in the Lord.*
Adherents sign a “concurrence to the Call” declaring “their hearty concurrence in the Call addressed by the members of the said congregation to Mr. . . . to be their pastor.”
*Attention is directed to the “Address to Congregations about to call a Minister” printed on another page.—Editor.
The obligations thus entered into, one would think, are of a sufficiently binding nature as not to be undertaken by anyone who had not the intention of carrying them out to the full. The light-hearted breach of promises solemnly and voluntarily undertaken brings it within the category of sins forbidden in the ninth commandment—”breach of lawful promises” (Larger Catechism). Some time ago we heard one of our ministers remark in public that after being settled in his charge he discovered that there was a considerable number who signed his call who were not darkening the place of worship from one Sabbath to another. On his pastoral visits he asked one of these why he was not attending the means of grace. “Well, sir,” was his answer, “I used to attend the prayer meetings and the service on the Sabbath but I took ill and was confined to bed for some time. When I got better I did not go out and the habit of staying in grew on me until at last when I would make up my mind to go out I thought the people would say that a change for the better had come over me and I stayed in.” “How long have you been neglecting the means of grace?” asked the minister. “Fourteen years,” was the answer. The devil certainly had found in this man material of a very pliable nature. Another of our ministers told us that when the congregation were shaking hands with him at his induction one man gave him a specially hearty shake and said: “Until death do us part.” The minister remarked that the man attended the services about three months and then forsook his congregation altogether. No doubt, these are exceptionable cases and it would be most unjust to place others who are not fulfilling the promises they made in the same category but it is necessary to remind all who are failing in their duty in fulfilling promises that it is with God and not man they have to do in the end. No compulsion is used to make a man sign a call or concurrence with a call. It is a voluntary act, an obligation solemnly entered into and not to be treated as a scrap of paper when the name is adhibited to the Call. Further, every minister has a right to expect that those who promised him “all dutiful respect, encouragement, and obedience in the Lord” that they would implement their promise. Our people, we believe, as a general rule, are faithful attenders on the means of grace but there are not wanting signs that the spirit of non-attendance on these means which is a characteristic of the age is infecting some of them and that the flimsiest excuses imaginable are advanced for non-attendance—excuses which they would be ashamed to advance for non-attendance at business or work.
The rules in connection with signing calls will be set forth in a future issue of the Magazine.