Untitled article by Editor

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Feb 26, 1885

The Church. No. 3.

By Editor

REFERENCE has been made to the wrong of laying hands suddenly, inconsiderately or unwisely, upon any one who may thereby be placed in position in the church of God. And we ought to extend the consideration to the injury which may be done by unwisely encouraging any one to take upon himself any sacred office for which he has not the proper qualifications. The principle is the same, whether it be applied to a local elder or a minister. Such an action is injurious to the church, to the individual, and of course to the cause of Christianity:

A man once solicited a license to preach. At one Conference he was put off, as none but himself believed that he had any duty in that direction. At the next Conference he was yet more persistent; and one of the elders remarked that such cases were hard to cure without a trial, and advised to give him a license, as a license for one year would probably put an end to his asking.

Unfortunately, as we thought, this advice was followed. The man had a family, and a home for them; a small farm, with plenty of fruit, and a comfortable house. Having unbounded confidence in his success as a preacher if he could have a suitable field, he sold his home and moved to a more new section of the country. But his efforts to preach were complete failures, and, as is too often the case, he ascribed his failures to every cause but the right one. He soon became involved in some difficulty, with one or more of the believers, and thereafter devoted all his energies to vindicating himself and to showing that the others were all wrong. He paraded these matters before every congregation that he met until all classes became disgusted with his course. The last time we saw him the money for which he sold his home was all gone; his family were destitute of the comforts of life; he was complaining of everybody—of the individuals with whom he got into trouble; with the church members because they would not uphold him and condemn the others; and of the Conference because they suffered him to expend all his means and did not come to his support. And in such a condition there was not much more hope that he would ever live a Christian life than there was that he would ever become a successful minister.

It may, indeed, be said that he alone was to blame for the sadness of his condition, because the Conferences always give licentiates to understand that the first giving of a license is only a trial, an experiment, which is not to be considered as a pledge of much, if any, pecuniary support. But this is not altogether a correct view of the case. By giving him a license they strengthened his conviction that it was his duty to preach, and increased his confidence in his own ability, inasmuch as he was caused to think that others saw in him those qualities which he imagined he saw in himself. His worldly matters were deranged and his family brought to destitution; the churches in the field of his work were disheartened and weakened; and the cause was reproached before the world, as he was taken as its representative, coming there under the sanction of the Conference, holding a license under it. All this might have been avoided by a more judicious and consistent course; by giving the man proper counsel and refusing to give him a license.

Another instance. A young man apparently had a call to the ministry. And it appeared, to those having the oversight of the work, advisable to send him to a field somewhat distant. And if he were sent to that field it was suggested that it would be advisable to have him ordained, that he might meet the wants of the cause in every phase in which it might be presented. Some expressed doubts of the propriety of the course suggested, but the suggestion was acted upon. He was ordained and sent into the field. His case differed from that of the other man, because he had ability as a speaker, and under a judicious course of instruction and training he might have made a useful laborer. But he was elated with the dignity of position suddenly thrust upon him. He became puffed up, haughty and overbearing in his demeanor, and injured the cause wherever he went. He soon became restive under the counsel of the officers of the Conference and unwisely chose his own places and methods of labor. After some time of worse than useless labor, when all distrusted his calling to the position he occupied, we advised him to go into a new place, secure a hearing, and hold on in that place until he had raised up a church and established it in the truth. Only in that way could he satisfactorily settle the question of his call to the ministry. His reply to this remark gave us the clue to his entire failure. He said, "That question was settled when I was ordained."

He made shipwreck of his faith, after shaking the confidence of many in the stability and nature of our work, and especially in the correctness of our Conference organizations. The whole amount of the injury done to individuals, to the churches, and to the cause at large by this one injudicious act of laying hands suddenly on this man, will never be known to us until the great day shall reveal the secrets of all hearts.

A certain church held an election, and chose for the elder a man who had been some time a professor of the faith, who appeared to have abounding zeal, but of whom this particular church knew but little, as he had not been long a resident of that place. We were present. We had the most friendly feelings toward the man, but were firmly convinced that the church had acted unwisely,—that he was not qualified to serve them in the position to which they had chosen him. Under such circumstances it sometimes becomes a serious question what course the attending minister should pursue. In this case we knew that the individual elected was sensitive, and it would have been hazardous to say to the church that they had made a mistake. He would have settled back in complete discouragement and attracted sympathizers to blame us for his overthrow. Upon reflection we decided to waive the ordination, and absented ourselves from the place for a few weeks that the case might develop itself. On our return we found that no argument was needed to convince the church that they had acted indiscreetly. Already the elder elect was at variance with the members, and it was painfully evident that the prosperity of the church depended upon a reversal of their action.

When he laid before us his complaint against the church, for he was the first to complain, we advised him to decline the office. As he had not been ordained, and as he had convincing proof that he could not serve them acceptably, we told him that he had it in his power to give an easy solution to the difficulty, by declining the office, and requesting them to elect another. And then he further proved his unfitness to bear responsibility in the church by utterly refusing to take this advice. Had he accepted it and acted upon it, he would have raised himself in the estimation of his brethren, and restored good feeling in the church. But his refusal to do so widened the breach between them, and they were compelled to rescind the vote by which he was elected.

This leads us to speak of another error which often obtains in the churches. Brethren sometimes feel that, because it is their privilege to choose their officers, therefore it is an infringement on their rights to offer advice in regard to their choice. Had the church, or the leading brethren, consulted us in the matter, we could have given them information which would have saved them from all this trouble. But they did not consult us; they asked no advice; and we could give them none, because we had no means of knowing whom they were about to choose. In order to act freely in our choice it is not necessary to vote blindly, to be moved by caprice or humor, or by some personal feeling. All should act as intelligently as possible, having in view the honor of God and the best interests of his cause. And they should seek the best information and advice they can get in order to thus act.

These instances are quite sufficient to illustrate and enforce the lesson which we have before us: "Lay hands suddenly on no man; neither be partaker of other men's sins." If we do that which naturally tends to lead others to injure themselves, their brethren, and the cause of truth, we are to some degree responsible for the injury so done. Again the apostle says: "And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men." But in order to fulfill this injunction we must know that they are faithful; they must be proved.

And what is true of the elder, in this respect, is true also of the deacon. He should be a man of experience, a man of judgment; not excitable, not one whose judgment is easily swayed from the right, and whose sympathies are easily perverted. Such weaknesses in a deacon are often as dangerous to the peace and prosperity of the church as they are in an elder. As will be seen in the consideration of their qualifications, the deacons have often to deal with some of the most difficult and delicate questions which come before the officers of the church.

The duties of the clerk are more easily defined; and his qualifications are more easily determined than those of either of the other officers. They are such as almost every intelligent person, capable of transacting ordinary business, may be supposed to possess. Yet we are sorry to say that, as a general thing, the duties of church clerks are most sadly neglected, or very imperfectly done. We have found comparatively few, in all our travels, whose books gave satisfactory knowledge of the doings and the standing of their respective churches; few who are prompt and thorough in making their reports to the Conference. We shall be highly pleased if our efforts shall cause an improvement in this respect.