24 March 2026

I have just received a newsletter from a charge in another Presbytery which is vacant but does not have the right to call a minister. Inside, there was some detail about their inability to pay for a locum after April. This is because of the General Assembly's decision to withdraw the Vacancy Allowance in these circumstances.

As a result of this, the services which should have had a celebration of the Sacrament had been changed to services in which the Sacrament was not celebrated because the charge had no access to a minister.  This concerned me for three reasons.

Firstly, in withdrawing the Vacancy Allowance, did the General Assembly make financial provision to pay for a minister to celebrate the Sacrament in these situations?

Secondly, accessibility to the Sacrament should not be dependent on a congregation's ability to pay. Why should wealthy congregations receive such means of grace and others be denied it?

Thirdly, in the Scots Confession (1560), the notes of the true Kirk are listed. ‘First, the true preaching of the Word of God … secondly, the right administration of the sacraments of Christ Jesus … lastly, ecclesiastical discipline …’

Without the celebration of the sacraments, the church is deficient. It does not witness to what constitutes the true Kirk. If finances are not available to pay for an ordained minister to celebrate the sacraments then Presbytery or General Assembly should make good this extraordinary denial  of God’s means of grace!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog