CHAPTER XI. ON DEACONS, AS A THIRD ORDER OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. § 1. The ground assumed by prelacy. WE have thus far, for the sake of distinctness, confined our argument to the claims of presbyters and prelates. But it is necessary to remember that prelatists affirm, that it is evident to all men, diligently reading holy scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's church-bishops, priests, and deacons." It is here, therefore, with all positiveness declared, that Christ and his apostles instituted deacons as a third order, of ministers, that is, for coöperating in the work of preaching, baptizing, and other ministerial functions. Upon this basis, as much as upon the order of prelates, the existence and stability of the prelatical sect, together with its entire claim to the character of a scriptural and apostolical church, is founded. If, therefore, it can be shown that this pillar of the hierarchy is unsound, the whole fabric must be abandoned, since two of its three pillars will be cut from under it. § 2. The deacon, according to scripture, not an order in the christian ministry, but a distinct office. All the reformed churches agree in believing that the scriptures clearly point out deacons as distinct officers in the church, whose business it is to take care of the poor-to distribute among them the collections which may be raised for their useand generally to manage the temporal affairs of the church. 1) Pref. to Form and Order of making Bishops, in Common Prayer Book. See also Laws and Canons of the Prot. Ep. Ch. 2) See Potter on Ch. Govt. pp. 48, 49. Am. ed. They are mentioned as a distinct class of officers in the church at Philippi, (Phil. 1: 1,)—in 1.Tim. 3: 8, 12, 13—and probably in 1 Peter 4: 10, 11, and Rom. 12: 6, 7. Of their election by the people, and ordination by the presbytery, we have a full account in Acts 6: 1-6. Their character, and the nature and design of their office, must therefore be drawn from this history, in connection with the qualifications laid down for their office by the inspired apostles. Nor can there be any hesitation in coming to our conclusion, since the language in both cases is clear and explicit. The model of the christian church was formed, as we shall see, upon the order of the Jewish synagogue. Now in every synagogue there were parnasin, or deacons, 'or such as had the care of the poor, whose work it was to gather alms for them from the congregation, and to distribute it to them." Such is the opinion of Lightfoot, which he abundantly corroborates by quotations from Jewish writings. Similar, also, is the judgment of bishop Burnet, who says, 'the charge of the parnasin, or deacons, was to gather the collections of the rich and to distribute them to the poor. '2 It was evidently in accordance with this existing order, that the apostles, by divine direction, instituted the office of deacons ; and we may therefore expect to find the duties assigned to them to be similar. This, accordingly, is undoubtedly the case. The reason given by the apostles for the institution was, that 'it was not reasonable that they should leave the word of God, (that is, the ministry of the word,) and serve tables.' (Acts 6: 2.) 'Wherefore, brethren,' say they, 'look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business, but we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word,' (verses 3, 4.) Now these tables must refer to the supply of the temporal necessities of the poor, out of that common fund which was committed to the apostles. An evident inconsistency or incongruity is alleged to exist between the discharge of this duty and the ministry of the word, which could not be the case were the allusion made to the administration of ordinances. Such administration, prelatists will be the last to think the apostles would disparage and hand over to an inferior order, especially when there were so many of themselves, besides the 1) Lightfoot's Works, vol. iii. pp. 189, 268, and vol. viii. p. 106, &c. and vol. xi. p. 89, &c. 2) Obs. on the 2d Canon, p. 53. See also Riddle's Christ. Antiq. p 237. Mosheim de Reb. Chr. M. presbyters then or shortly afterwards ordained, with whom they were associated as a presbytery in discharging all ministerial duties to the church at Jerusalem. With this most explicit statement of the office of deacons, agree the descriptions given elsewhere. The qualifications laid down in 1 Tim. 3, are precisely those which the discharge of such responsible and trusty services would require. In Romans 12: 6, 7, the deaconship is immediately connected with 'giving' and 'showing mercy." And in like manner in 1 Peter 4: 10, 11, a man is to 'exercise the office of a deacon as of the ability which God giveth' or furnisheth, that is, to the full extent of the supply furnished him in the providence of God. We are, therefore, told, that 'they that have used the office of a deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree,' that is, says Lightfoot, 'a good degree towards being intrusted with souls when they have been faithful in discharge of their trust concerning the life of the body." Deacons, therefore, were regarded as probationers for the office of the ministry, if found to be suitable and worthy; but they were not considered to be an order in the ministry. The Holy Ghost designed that they should be a seminary or nursery, out of which the church might be furnished with fit persons for the ministry of the word and doctrine, and in which they might be fully proved and tested before admission into this sacred office." They were officers in the church, associated with the ministers, to attend to the interests of the poor and to the temporalities of the congregation, but they were not, as deacons, partakers of the one priesthood or ministry of the church. Even women might be deaconesses, and as such were ordained, and discharged towards the female members of the church all those duties which the deacons performed towards the males. But, according to apostolic rule, women, we know, were not permitted to teach in the church, and hence deacons could not have been regarded as capable of any of these functions. § 3. This conclusion sustained by eminent prelatists. This is the conclusion drawn from the scripture account by the learned episcopalian, Lightfoot, who says, 'the office of 1) See these views, and the subject of the deacon, fully treated of in Neander's History of the Plant. of Christ. by the Ap. vol. i. ch. iii. p. 140, &c. 2) See the original, and Wilson on Deacons. Philadelphia, 1841, p. 3) Wilson, ibid, p. 6. Scott, Henry, Grotius, Piscator, and Calvin in loco. 4) Works, vol. iii. page 258, and vol. xi. p. 90. 5) See Jameson's Sum of the Episcopal Controversy, pp. 94, 95. deacons was not ministerial or for the preaching of the word, but for providing for the poor." So speaks Mr. Riddle, who is also an episcopalian, in his learned work on Christian Antiquities, where he says, 'it does not appear that they were appointed to the ministry of the word, but rather the contrary may be inferred from verse 2 and verse 4. Fifthly, they were not spiritual persons, in the ecclesiastical sense of the term."2 'But can it be imagined,' says bishop White, 'that an order instituted for the purpose of serving tables, should, in the very infancy of its existence, have the office of the ministry committed to them? . . . All I contend for is, that at the first institution of the order there could have been no difference between them and laymen, in regard to the preaching of the word and the administering of the sacraments.' As to deacons, bishop Croft, in his Naked Truth, thus delivers himself: 'Having thus stated and united the two pretended and distinct orders of episcopacy and presbytery, I now proceed to the third pretended spiritual order, that of deaconship. Whether this of deaconship be properly to be called an order or an office, I will not dispute; but certainly no spiritual order, for their office was to serve tables, as the scripture phrases it, which, in plain English, is nothing else but overseers of the poor, to distribute justly and discreetly the alms of the faithful; which the apostles would not trouble themselves withal, lest it should hinder them in the ministration of the word and prayer. But as most matters of this world, in process of time, deflect much from the original constitution, so it fell out in this business; for the bishops who pretended to be successors to the apostles, by little and little took to themselves the dispensation of alms, first by way of inspection over the deacons, but at length the total management, and the deacons who were mere lay-officers, by degrees crept into the church ministration, and became a reputed spiritual order, and a necessary degree and step to the priesthood, of which I can find nothing in scripture, and the original institution, not a word relating to any thing but the ordering of alms for the poor. And the first I find of their officiating in spiritual matters, is in Justin Martyr, who lived in the second century.' 24 The same testimony is given by Hadrian Saravia, who describes the deaconship as 'having for its object provision 1) Works, vol. viii. page 106. Bishop White, Letter to Bishop Hobart, p. 365. 4) Scott's Coll. of Tr. vol. vii. pp. 307, 308. 3 for the corporeal wants of the present life." "The early church,' he adds, 'following the examples of the apostles, employed deacons in the ministrations also of the word and sacraments. For it was fearned lest their functions should fall into contempt by appearing to be merely a stewardship in things temporal. . . . In order then to increase their dignity, they were authorized to read the gospel to the people and deliver the cup, &c.' Archbishop Wake concurs in the same views with the preceding writers, and so also archbishop Whateley, and archbishop Potter, who says, 'deacons are not ordained to be pastors of the flock of Christ, but only to minister to the pastors,' and, therefore, 'preaching in the public congregation, which does inseparably accompany the care of souls, cannot properly be any part of their office." He also affirms the same thing as it regards baptizing, from which also he excludes them. The same opinion is openly avowed by Mr. Hinds of Oxford,' by the Oxford Tractators, by bishop Beveridge," and by the author of Spiritual Despotism.10 Mr. Palmer, in his recent elaborate Treatise on the church, is under the necessity of admitting as much. The office of deacons,' says he, 'seems at first to have related chiefly to the administering of relief to the poorer brethren.' He only pleads that the church is justified 'in permitting deacons, in case of necessity, both to preach and to baptize."11 "They are not qualified to administer the sacrament of the holy eucharist, and other high offices of the ministry.'12 They are 'limited to duties of a temporal, or at least a very inferior character. They are only permitted to baptize and preach; the church has before now given the same permission to laymen in cases of necessity; they are not given the care of souls, or any of the other higher offices of the ministry." 'It does not seem either by the forms of ordination, or by the ritual, that the church formally invests deacons with the power of celebrating divine service without a presbyter, or performing the rites of marriage, benediction of women after child-birth, visitation of the sick, or burial of the dead.'11 1) On the Priesthood, p. 48. 2) Ibid, page 95. 3) Apost. Fathers Prel. Disc. § 15, p. 30. 4) Kingdom of Christ, Essay i § 20, p. 131, and § 11, p. 91, Eng. ed. 5) On Ch. Govt. pp. 208, 209. 6) Ibid, p. 228. 7) History of the Rise and Progress of Christianity, vol. i. pp. 218 220. 713 8) Oxford Tracts, vol. i. p. 31. Am. ed. 9) See also Beveridge's Works, vol. ii. p. 134. 10) App. to § 4, pp. 433, 434, Eng. ed. 11) Vol. ii. part vi. ch. iii. p. 405, Eng. ed. 12) Ibid, p. 408. 13) Ibid, p. 375. |