The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1869-07-07

people might approve, by letter unto Jeru
salem. How strange, that the deacons
neither at Corinith,, Galatia, nor Jerusalem
are mentioned as having anything to do in
that matter
Is it not plain, Mr.. Editor, that the
trainers of our Church Government felt they
had very little Scripture indeed, for a Pres,
byterian DiaconateP. And is it not equally
clear, that those able men felt they did not
know what to do with such a body; and,
therefore, they actually said nothing about
! its organization and mode of action
! Having spoken thus much, drawn from
the Bible, we now affirm, there is no use for
q Presbyterian Diaeopsle.. And, to make it
hving agency, will be to giTe.lifs to adam.
gerOus pOacer% ~. - -
That there is no necessity for a Board OF
Deacons, is clear from the following consid-
erations:
1.) Our churches, in large majority, have
no such board. And, to speak guardedly,
in Scotland and Ireland, the ,Daconate has
been, and is, very much discontinued.
(2.) Such board, where it exists, has lit
tie work to do, and that little is poorly done.
The exceptions are only to be found where
the pastor is a man of administrative talents,
and has the ability, and We may add, the
fancy to manipulate the Boards of Ruling
Elders and Deacons, so as to have them
work in some system, and to act in some har-
mony together q
(3.) There is no use for the Diaconate in
any respect whatsoever; because commit
tee of the Board of Ruling Elders, can do
all the work-can do it with much greater
efficiency, and with more sanction of recQg-
Missed pOe0er, and dignity Of position; while
the clerk of the session and the treasurer
will have the congregational book, all ready
for the proper records.
Moreover, there is nothing, whatsoever,
in the obligations upon the Board of Ruling
Elders, either in their duties as ecclesiastical
helps, or spiritual advisers of the pastor, to
forbid their SO acting; and, beyond contra
diction, there is nothing to prevent them in
the pressure Of time, IN any arduous ecclesi-
astical or spiritual sOOrk' How many hours
in the whole year do they spend in ecclesias'
tical work-how much in their spiritual
work?
Our last, and conclusive argument against
the DiacOnate, is this: If you do not give
it an efficient organization, then it is, what
it has ever been, with here and there an ex-
ception, an agency doing little or nothing to
reach the desired result; but, give 1t life /;
that is, give it the control of property, and
especially MONEY, and it instantly becomes a
pOwer full of danger. Yea, for whether you
give it the right Of vOting or not, 1t wiH rule
the session and the Church. Yea verify, for
such a Board may have in its hands tens of
thousands of dollars; and sooner or later,
an acute man Of a0iU is seen to be master of
the position.
Finally, bear in mind, that many churches
have a Board of Irustees---and sometimes
this Board is a BODY CORPORATE. This
Board then, claims in part, if not wholly,
the right over the temporalities-landS,
houses, money. This fact discloses another
reason to show there is no use for Diacon-
ate; for is it not manifest that the two agea-
cies cover, more or less, the same field of
work and, however you may divide their
responsibilities, you have in such agencies
two, instead of one, power of evil; both
bearing upon the session; and between these
upper and lower mill stones, the Pastor and
Ruling Elders will be ground to powder.
We know what we affirm. And we speak
advisedly when we beseech every church in
the land to see to it, never to elect Board
Of DeacOns. And if they have one, give it
no power distinct from the session whatso-
ever.
One other caution-if any charges has
committed the temporalities to a Board OF
Trustees, then let it study the powers giyen
to this Board, and bring it as far, and as
soon as possible, under the control Of the
recognised government of the Church--THK
SESSION.
In conclusion, We earnestly hope, that
''Cameron" will press the examination Of
the Diaconate. We are fully settled in the
views now expressed; and, all the more, af-
ter reading repeatedly, Dr.. S. Miller on
Ruling Elders and Deacons. 1t is clear as
day, that he, and all the learned men have
been in perfect muddle about the meaning
of Acts 6, and the Scrfptural DiacOmatt
thereafter. Why Roman Catholics, Episco.
palians, High and Low, CongregatiOnallsts
Independents, Presbyterians, all claim these
Scriptures. And, as to DR.. Miller, or any
body else, finding in all the New Testament
a thus saith the Lord for the Presbyterian
Board of Deacons, the facts and arguments
result in an utter break down.
No. The Bible makes it plain, that TIL
PREsBYTER--THE PAsToR--was, and is, th'
BISHOP. But, whether HE may have {
Bench of Ruling Elders, to form, with him
the GOVERNING POWER, and spiritual conn
cil-or, whether HE may be the PRESENTER
without such Boad-or, whether he may b.
the PREsBYTER-elected to a function Of Of
flee above his brethren-and be thus the es
pecial BISHOP so elevated. All this, w