The Presbyterian Of The South : [Combining The] Southwestern Presbyterian, Central Presbyterian, Southern Presbyterian

Contributed

THE EXODUS FROM OUR PASTORATES.

By Rev. J. E. Flow, D. D.

The last General Assembly, "in view of the serious lack of ministers in our pastorates," urged that steps be taken "to stop as far as possible any unnecessary drain upon our pastorates." It is generally admitted that the situation is serious. But how serious is it? Is it serious enough for anything worth while to be done about it? A study of the last Assembly's Minutes will give us some light on the subject.

For the first time in the history of our Church the number of ministers went over the two thousand mark, 2,013, with a net increase of 57 ministers during the year. This, with the greatly increased contributions and the addition of 20,643 members on profession, is very encouraging. But we find that we have 88 less churches than we had a year ago, and as the number of churches organized and dissolved are about the same, these 88 churches just disappeared and from present indications there are more to follow. We have 2,359 churches, but by actual count 894 or 27 per cent. of the whole number are marked vacant with no indication that they have even an occasional supply.

Subtracting the 119 ordained foreign missionaries we have 1,894 ministers and 42 licentiates in the home land. Of this number 1,158 are pastors or pastors-elect and 778 are not pastors.

Thus we have a little less than 60 per cent. of our ministers in the pastorate and more than 40 per cent out of the pastorate. 142 of them have nothing in the minutes to indicate that they are infirm or are doing any sort of religious work. The writer does not question in his mind that all these brethren are doing good—many of them no doubt are filling the largest measure of usefulness—but the question is why are so many of our ministers leaving the pastorate? Why have we so many vacant churches and so many ministers who are not pastors?

Why have we 27 per cent. of our churches vacant and 40 per cent. of our ministers without a church? Were these men not ordained as pastors or evangelists?

The usual answer to this question is the inadequate salaries paid by the weaker churches. There is, of course, a measure of truth in that, but it is far from all the truth. For the ministers in the Southern Presbyterian Church are as well paid, if not better paid than the ministers of any other evangelical church.

The gifts of our Church last year to Home Missions and pastors' salaries average $1,800 for the active men in the Church, deducting 106 men who are assisted by the fund for Ministerial Relief. There must be some other reason than the financial one or we will have to admit that our ministers have less of the spirit of sacrifice than those of other churches. There is no church that can show a higher type of ministry nor a ministry that will more gladly endure hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ.

The stubborn fact faces us, with our people giving more liberally than any other evangelical church, we are not taking care of our churches nor keeping our ministers employed in preaching the Gospel to our churches. Many of them are forced to turn aside from the ministry for a livelihood. What is the matter with our system? Why should we as Presbyterians have only one-third as many members as the Methodists in the United States? They have a church in every village and on every hilltop and none of them are vacant. The writer of this article is a jure divino Presbyterian, and is unwilling to sacrifice a single principle of Presbyterianism. The principles of Presbyterianism are Bible principles and we cannot improve on them.

Jesus Christ gave a government to His Church and that is by elders, or Presbyterian. But unless we are to conclude that it is in harmony with the will of the Master for us to have hundreds of shepherdless churches and scores of idle ministers, we are forced to admit that there is a fatal defect in the application of our system. The Master was moved with compassion as He saw the multitudes as sheep without a shepherd, and urged His disciples to pray. We have been praying for many years, with more or less earnestness and faith, and the situation is growing no better, for we have as many vacant churches as ever.

Can we expect God to give us more ministers when we are not using those He has given us, in the work of the ministry? Evidently the problem is to place the shepherds over the flocks, and then pray God to give us more men and prove our faith by using the men God has given us. The same sad tale of vacant churches is told every year, some of the Presbyteries have more vacant churches than supplied, and we have gotten used to it, have come to regard it as a necessity, and perhaps we have almost come to the position of being satisfied with it or at least are not willing for any real change that will remedy the situation. We would not minimize the fact that our Church has grown in spite of this handicap and been blessed, but our country has also grown and so have the forces of evil grown.

What are we going to do about it? Nothing will be done about it until the Church is aroused to realize the necessity of meeting the situation in this the twentieth century. Nothing can be done until we are ready to become Presbyterians in practice as well as in theory. The real trouble is we are Presbyterians in theory and Congregationalists in practice and enjoy the disadvantages of both forms and none of the advantages of either. Instead of the Presbytery taking the initiative, that is left for the Church to do, if they want to, and if they don't want to, then there is nothing doing, as a rule.

If a church wants to spend months or even years in sampling preachers before they call one the Presbytery adopts the policy of watchful waiting. More than one good strong church has been known to spend two or three years in sampling preachers before they called one and in one instance one-third of the people had left the church and had united with other churches, while the elders were sampling preachers.

If a church tires of a pastor and they feel his work is done in that field, they proceed the only way they know to get rid of him and that is by creating an undercurrent of dissatisfaction that will eventually result in an open rupture to the embarrassment of the minister and the injury of the church. Then the Presbytery will dissolve the relation and turn out the preacher to graze on the commons, with no provision to make use of his services or care for his support. Many of our ministers past middle age, when they are fitted to do their best work, desire a change, and know it would be best and the churches know it too, but there is no good way for a minister to change his field of labor under our congregational system.

Some of our ministers are in prominent fields and have reached the age when they are not able to handle so heavy a work, and would welcome a change to take a lighter field and continue to serve the Church many years, but there is nothing left for them to do, but wear themselves out in a field that is too hard for their physical strength. Some of our ministers have been too long in the same pastorate, and instance after instance can be shown where our Church has been left far behind by the other churches in the same town.

What is the remedy for all this? It is found in the application of the principles of Presbyterianism.

1. Let the Presbyteries bring their episcopal authority out of cold storage and exercise it in appointing ministers to their several pastoral charges. It is the duty of the Presbytery to "require ministers to devote themselves diligently to their sacred calling and to censure those found delinquent," but how is this to be done if the Presbytery provides them with no work and no support? Hence the necessity for the Presbytery to exercise episcopal authority over the churches as well as over the ministers.

2. Let the churches each year at an annual meeting call for the services of a minister, or recall their pastor, if they desire, and let them express their preference for two or three men, so that the Presbytery as far as possible can allow the church to choose its own pastor, but not allow them to remain vacant indefinitely as many of them now do.

3. Let the ministers also express their convictions as to their duty, whether to remain in their present pastorate or to go to some other.

4. Let the Presbyteries at an annual meeting, say spring meeting, elect an Executive Committee to recommend the appointments for all the ministers over the churches for the following year. Or have an Executive Commission of Presbytery to make the appointments subject, of course, to the approval of Presbytery. If a minister should remain in his present pastorate by all means let him remain, but if he should move then move him and take care of him and the church at the same time. Certainly the Presbytery is competent to do the right thing and there is nothing arbitrary about such a plan.

5. Let the whole Church through the General Assembly set a definite time, say May 1st or June 1st, after the spring meeting of Presbytery, for pastoral changes to be made so that there need be no difficulty in a minister's passing from one Presbytery to another when desirable.

This is a modified form of the Methodist Protestant Church government, and every principle of Presbyterianism is safeguarded. There is the right of every church to express its preference for a pastor, and the only right denied them is to stay vacant and die. Of course, every church cannot have the best preacher under any system, but the Presbytery can intelligently do the best they possibly can for all parties concerned.

There is the right of the minister to express his preference. If he has a happy and fruitful pastorate he need not be disturbed. If his work has grown too heavy for the state of his health and age he can be given a lighter work where he can take a new lease on life and his usefulness be conserved to the Church. If there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction in the church that will lead to open rupture, to the embarrassment of the minister and the injury of the church, he can be placed in a field that will be harmonious. If a church shows a factional spirit, or any part of the church shows it, the Presbytery has the authority to deal with it.

There is the judgment of the Church court as to the minister's fitness for the church or churches to which he is called. The great aim in all this is to ascertain the mind of the Spirit of God in calling men to their work. These three things are separate links in the chain of evidence of the Spirit's call:—the voice of the people, the conviction of the minister himself as to his duty, and the judgment of the Church court as to his fitness. And here, too, we have the parity of the ministry, the ruling elders of equal authority with the ministers, the right of appeal, and the episcopal authority of the Presbytery.

The writer does not claim this plan to be the panacea for all the ills that afflict the Church, but he does claim that no principle of Presbyterianism is violated, and that if we would adopt and work this plan it would keep our churches much better supplied, relieve our ministers of a great deal of embarrassment, and make such changes in our pastorates as would conserve our working forces and use the ministers that God has given us to the best advantage.

If we believe, as we do, in the call of the Spirit to the work of the pastorate, let us not shut our eyes and close our ears to the evidences of the call for a quarter or a half century, as we are doing in some cases now. If a long pastorate be the mind of the Spirit this plan does not interfere, but it does assure a pastor of his standing.

Of course objections can be raised to any plan ever suggested on earth, but it is to be remembered that objections remove no difficulties and solve no problems. If any one has a better plan, let us have it, but let us not be content with 27 per cent. of our churches dying for want of a pastor and 40 per cent. of our ministers out of the pastorate. Let us honor the pastorate to which most of us were ordained, stay in it, and as Presbyters see that the pastors and churches are cared for by adopting some effective means of placing our ministers over the churches and keep our eyes and ears open to the call of the Spirit through the voice of His Church, the conviction of the minister as to his duty, and the judgment of the Presbytery. Let us have the compassion of the Master as He beheld the multitudes as sheep without a shepherd, and let us come to the rescue of the men of God who stand all the day idle because no Presbytery hath hired them.

Alderson, W. Va.