:.1 .. . . . . - . . . .. .. , . . OM. . c . , .1.,,,.., -.. ... . . i ..... . .. . . .. .. ~. ~.„.•..... . • . , , . . .. "eft. ~.• .„ . • . . . - Alb. - . lain, . • .., ' 4 . s 5:, .•—• . • ,:: -.•;,' ~. :. ~-;,.:- ••: .......itvAl . ',. 71 _ 1 -`4 . . , . . • . 0 , . , ~• - • . . - . .. . . Pr•sbyterlau llaikawro Vol. Vile INN 2 7. PreiliFtsrlan Advosato. Vol. XXI, *6.23 I AVID MoKINNEY and JAMES ALLISON, Editors ZERMB.-IN ADVANCE. For the Presbyterian Banner and Advocate Demission of the Ministerial Office. MESSRS EDITORS :—The last General Assembly sent down to the Presbyteries an overture proposing so to alter the Form of Government, as to make provisions for the demission of the exercise of the ministerial office, in certain oases and under certain restrictions. The overture may be found at page two hundred and ninety-nine, of the printed minutes of the Assembly. I. had hoped that, before this time, some one, who might command more leisure and wield an abler pen than myself, would have called the attention of the Presbyteries to the merits of this overture; for it certainty in volves questions of great moment. Disap pointed in this hope, I venture to ask per mission to state a few of the reasons which weigh upon my own mind favorable to the proposed change. lam prompted to do this partly by the fact, that a number of my brethren fro& widely separated portions of the Church, have addressed me by letter upon the subject, inquiring for the history of the overture, and for the reasons which its friends urge in favor of adopting it. This will be a convenient method of replying to these inquiries. And I solicit a candid con sideration of what I shall say, which shall consist rather of heads of argument than of thorough dispassion. I. The history of the proposed change. There was an overture, asking the Assembly to propose the change, before the General .Assembly of 1841. After passing through the hands of several Committees, it was finally committed to a special Committee, of which the Assembly appointed its Moderator, (Dr. R J. Breckenridge,) Chairman; who filled 'the Committee with the named of Drs. Phillips, Cuyler, and: Krebs, and Mr. Mack lin. This Committee was ordered to report to the next General Assembly; which it did, and that Assembly (1842,) sent down the proposal in substance, though not in the form now submitted, to the Presbyteries. (See minutes of that year, page twenty-nine.) To the Assembly of 1843, fifty-nine Presby teries sent answers to the overture; thirty agreeing to the charge, and twenty-nine dis agreeing, whilst from forty-cwo no report was received. So the overture failed, al though a majority of the Presbyteries that reported were in favor of it. In 1846, one of the Presbyteries (Newton,) that had negatived the overture, changed their views, and petitioned the General Assembly of that 'year to renew the proposal. The Presbytery of Philadelphia sent an overture to the same effect. The subject was referred !o a 'Committee, of which Dr. Breckinridge was Chairman; that Committee reported, and the report was referred to the next General Assembly, which met at Richmond, (1847.) That Assembly" took up the subject , referred _6o thelxlr , ond oottimitted.i4,te...,aoCoreafittee.l of which the present writer was Chairman, and of which the venerable Dr.' Hoge was a member. It was upon the suggestion of Dr. Hoge that the, overture was , put in its present form, so as to apply to ministers • the same process of demission already applied to elders. The Assembly by a l strona,vote sub mitted it to the Presbyteries. Next, year, eighty-nine Presbyteriee answered, sixty three negatively, twenty•six affirmatively, and thirty five made no report. The matter Was brought before the last General Assam bly, by an overture' from the Synod of Phila delphia, asking the Assembly to renew. the .proposal of 1847. This was done, and thus the matter now stands before the Presby teries. Such is 'the history of this pro posal. 11. I propose now to.sugest a few heads of thought favorable to the proposed change. And, Ist. Our Form of Government, in ex press terms, assumes - that the thing, for which it is proposed to make constitutional provision, "often happens ;" and yet makes no provision for having it “happen " in an orderly way. [See Form of Government, Chap. xxiii. Sec. 6.] Here provision is made for the orderly demission of the office of Ruling Elder and Deacon ; and the Book asserts the fact, that the same thing it often happens in the case of a minister;" but we search. the book in vain for the process, by which, in case of a minieter, the thing is to be so effected as to be lawful, and consistent with the vows of a. minister, the duties of the Church courts, and the analogy of our Governmental system. What is now pro posed is to remedy this manifest defect, and have an orderly process of doing what our Book already recognizes as an often occurring fact. 2d. The provision is demanded by the analogy of our principles of Government; the theory of which is that, in the Session or Parochial Presbytery, the representatives of the people shall possess a controlling majority, and in all other Church courts one of a majority, if they choose; or at least an equality with the ministerial members. An equal number of ministers and elders in all courts above the Session is, evidently our theory; and , as the Moderator id a minister, it gives the elders a majority of one. But as things are,.ministers who have demitted the office de facto ; are still members of the higher Church courts 'de jure, are counted in the basis of representation in the General Assembly, and in fact do often share as fully in the government of God's people, as those that are fully engaged in the work of the ministry, as doctors or pastors. Thus is the balance of our system destroyed. But this is one of the weakeriorguments. 3d. It not unfreiluently happens, that a man may mistake his railing, and enter the ministry without a suffieient call thereto; when in some other line' of life he Might much more usefully serve God and his gen eration. Must he, in such a ease, be oom• polled to remain in an office to which he hes discovered be had no call,•and the functions of which he may have no ability or no op portunity to perform ? He may be charge able with no crime—may indeed be a sincere Christian; but, having, by the injudicious advice of parents and friends, or the mis takes of his own judgthent, been led to en•'. ter the office, must be be held under its vows and responsibilities when his ability or circumstances forbid the performance of its duties ?" 4th. The dogma "once a minister al ways a minister" is a relic of Pa pal supersti tion lingering in the bosom of Protestant. ism. It is a port of the doctrine of orders which makes it a sacrament. It assumes, not only the infallibility of the source of others—the Churoh—but also the infalli bility of the candidate's own judgment. He cannot mistake his calling; and therefore, once in holy orders, there is no escape but by degradation.. This is not a doctrine of Protestantism, nor of the Bible, and is an excrescence upon our system. • sth. It is admitted that no man ought to enter the ministry without a call; ought a man to stay in the ministry without a call ? Ought he to be compelled to stay in it with out a call ? No man ought to be a minister whose conscience does not clearly constrain him to the office and the work; and when his conscience permits him to lay aside the work, he ought not to be conscientious against relinquishing the honors and prerog atives; nor should he be hemmed in by Church rules and public sentiment, so that he cannot withdraw from eo anomalous a re lation to the Church. VI. Many a worthy man, who misht - be useful in some secular calling, is embarrassed all his life by the feet that he has no alter native but to continue a minister, whilst he has no opportunity of exercising the office; onto be dishonored in the process of remov al from the office. Some, for want of talents or manner, cannot get chakes ; some, who have health for ,other callings, have not health to perform the labors of the ministry; some have lost their interest in the work, and have gone, as a matter of taste, into secular employments; and some may have beconie convinced that they had mistaken their call ing% Now, by the present'system, they are constrained, either to suffer for laok of a livelihood, or to engage in . secular employ ments, whilst still bearing the sacred office, thus, unintentionally and by force of cir cumstances, bringing reproach upon the office. VIL. There is -a -greater- necessity for the ' proposed arrangement than 'there was at the time our Book was framed. Then probation for the ministry was extended through a larger time. Ordination did• not so closely follow lioeneure as now. A libentiate had more tints to' try hie gifts. ,hie taste; and strength for the work, and Presbyteries and people had fairer opportunities of judging of the claims of the candidate to ordination. Fewer were likely to mistake , their calling. VIII. The proposed amendment will pro vide a method for getting clear of that in cubus of a Church, a horde of secularized ministers, or Ministers not engaged in their work. Already is this 'class so numerous as to afford a standing, argument against Your educational enterprises. " Why educate more, until you employ the men already on your rolls as ministers ?" I do' not allude to those that are usefully engaged in teach ing in colleges, schools, and seminaries, or to those who are preaching through the press to tens of thousands; but' to those Who are in no *ay employed in work 'appropriate to the. ministry: Many of these • brethren, :..itria 4 believedMetideglatlbf portunity of retiring from a relation to the Chtirch, and the Church Courts, which is so embarrassing and anomalous; whilst in' the case of a few, it might be the duty of the Courts to advise them to demit. Suoh as are in civil office, to the neglect or the dishonor of the ministry, ought to be ad vised, either to fulfill-their vows,or consent to be released from them. And this suggests the argument which, to the writer's mind, ought to be conclusive on this question. IX. It is wrong to permit, much more to constrain a man to remain Under the obliga tion otordination vows,' when he has ceased to perform the functions to which the vows bind him ; and when there is no reasonable prospect that he will resume those functions. The vow -of ordination binds the minister to be "diligent and faithful," not •only in "private and relative duties," but in=" all the public duties of the office. 44 NCIW, it right; to permit a man to live on, from year to year, under such a vow, which he does not or will not pay? Is it right to compel him to do so ? Or would it not be wiser and better to have a constitutional provision, by which the same authority that is the agent in imposing the 'obligation, - might, in case of necessity, release the man from it? Why hold a man all his life under obligations which he can not or will not discharge ? The proposed amendment would• be a condition in the vows of ordination, which would release the conscience of many a worthy brother from distress, whilst it could do no possible harm. To many a man; disqualified for the exercise of the office, by causee not involving immor ality, the proposed process would be a wel- Come relief; whilst its happy effect in purg ing our rolls, would tend to elevate the stand ard of ministerial position. X. The proposed amendment is well con sidered and carefully guarded in its provis ions and phraeelogy. It can never produce hardship; for nothing .of the kind can be done without the consent of the individual, except by advioe of Synod. And the same remedies that apply to other. oases, lie open to this, in case the action of a Presbytery is not agreeable. It can do no harm ; whilst it certainly will , do much good by softening _ disoipline, by reaching oases' where other processes would be too harsh, and especially by affording a lawful process' forth volun tary correction of 'mistakes, which, under the present system, prodaoe life•long em barrassment. I beg my brethren to remem ber that no new principle is involvedin the overture; for, as. I have shown, our Book already 118011M05 that the thing "often hap• pens with respect to a minister," and all that is proposed is to make provision for do• ing it in an orderly and constitutional- way. Let the brethren come to the consideration of this subject, With an eye single to the glory of God, the analogy of our system, the purity and dignity of the Christian min istry, and the welfare of our beloved Zion, • and-I trust it will meet with their approba tion. Now is the time to make the change, if eVer, for the reform of the discipline will involve anew edition of our Book, and we had better do all that is needed at once. Faithfully and fraternally, For the Presbyterian Banner and Advocate. A Query., 8 cou ld not ministers of the Gospel pay much attention to children and youth—often 'conversing with them directly in regard to their spiritual state and condition, and urging upOn them immediate submission to the Saviour? What think you, Mr. Ed itors ? • [Certainly; much . rio — tH d , sown. is lost for .want of diligent• 'se culture.— Ens.] "ONE THING IS NEEDFUL:" "ONE THING HOVE I DESIRED OF THE LORD:" "THIS ONE THING I DO." A recent flying visit into the bounds of tkO s treebytery of Sehuyier,. revealed-to the writer a gratifying state of , things in con nexion with the churches in that region. All the more important points, as we learned, in the bounds of Presbytery are occupied with faithful, earnest laborers. There are no