[ 96 ]
it must be perceived that the inducements to break these relations must be sufficiently strong ; and so it appeared in the cases upon which we are now treating. The finger of God must clearly point the course a pastor should pursue in such a case. To leave a charge on slight grounds, or simply that a call is made for services desired by another congregation, forms no part of a pastor's consideration. There may be instances where it may be duty to break these relations, as when a people, from some cause, or source, or rumor, loses confidence in a pastor, or when from some motive or circumstance he is no longer useful among them, or even when his ministry is not blest or of spiritual interest, it may be his Christian duty and obligation to resign his charge, that an opportunity may be afforded some other to take the pastoral oversight, whose labors may be more successful. But in all such cases, I repeat, God's direction must be sought, and not a step taken until it shall appear clear as a sunbeam that such are the leadings of Providence. Such, perhaps, may be the reasons we can best produce why these calls were not accepted, and why the church remained so long without a pastor.
It is not to be presumed, in a city like Philadelphia, a city of churches, and where there are so many enterprises, influences, and engagements of every color and description, that a church without a regularly installed minister, can hope to retain its membership. We need not be surprised at this statement, when we reflect that we are in an age of the world when proselyting from one denomination to another has become the fashion of the day, and particularly among some sectarians. Wherever this is seen and done, it is censurable and condemnable, if not abject, to say the least of it. On
