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
Post a Comment